The right to Gods gifts seems clearer if your Rastafarian...USA and Italy and Guam

It's not very widely known. But in a groundbreaking case, at least one American citizen, a licensed Rastafarian minister in Minnesota, has been openly smoking marijuana daily with a judge's approval for the past year and a half, despite the fact that he is on probation.

Jamison Arend
Jamison Arend of Minnesota won a groundbreaking religious exemption to being drug-tested for marijuana during his probation


Jamison Arend was sentenced to five years' probation on March 24, 2010 after an altercation at his home, reports WeedPress.

During sentencing, Judge Judith Tilsen handed down a trail-blazing

exemption to Minnesota's drug testing laws.

Minnesota Judicial Branch
Ramsey County Judge Judith Tilsen: "I'm specifically not ordering that Mr. Arend abstain from the use of marijuana and I'm specifically not authorizing UAs to defendant for marijuana"


"[T]he defense has proven a colorable claim of religious right to ceremonial use of cannibus [sic], otherwise known as marijuana," Judge Tilsen ruled. "Ceremonial use is intermittent use, but because of our chemistry and how we do UAs [urine analyses], it would seem to me that even with limited ceremonial use that a UA would come up dirty on a regular basis.

Minnesota Judicial Branch

Ramsey County Judge Judith Tilsen: "I'm specifically not ordering that Mr. Arend abstain from the use of marijuana and I'm specifically not authorizing UAs to defendant for marijuana"

​"I'm specifically not ordering that Mr. Arend abstain from the use of marijuana and I'm specifically not authorizing UAs to defendant for marijuana," the judge said. "If probation is concerned about use of other illegal substances, probation may then perform UAs for other illegal substances."

"Let me tell you something else, Mr. Arend, I usually order remain law-abiding in all respects," the judge told the defendant at the sentencing. "What I'm ordering for you is that you have no threatening behavior to anyone."

"I'm not going to order you to remain law-abiding because in the State of Minnesota the colorable claim that you have of being a Rastafarian and using marijuana as part of your ceremonies is not actually legal and if I ordered that you remain law-abiding knowing that you do something that is not legal in the State of Minnesota, I think I would be setting you up," the judge said.

"Another nail in the Reefer Madness coffin!" WeedPress commented.

This is the first religious exemption to probation drug testing that I can remember seeing; it represents a crack in the wall, since religious exemptions to the marijuana laws have been historically ineffective. (There are a number of people serving prison sentences today who unsuccessfully claimed an exemption for religious or spiritual use of cannabis.)

You can read the judge's entire ruling by clicking here [http://weedpress.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/scan0001.pdf].
Jamison Arend

Rasta smoker wins Italian case on religious grounds
Source: Rasta smoker wins Italian case on religious grounds, AP, via USAToday.com, July 11, 2008

ROME (AP) — If you’re a Rastafarian in Italy, you might be able to possess more marijuana than the law allows everyone else.

Italy’s highest criminal court has ruled that the fact Rastafarians consider marijuana use a religious sacrament should be taken into account if they are tried on trafficking charges, lawyers in a recent case and news reports said Friday.

Smoking pot in Italy is not a crime, but being caught with amounts considered too large for personal use can bring charges of trafficking.

The Court of Cassation threw out the drug trafficking conviction of a 44-year-old Italian Rastafarian, ruling that the amount he possessed was in line with the heavy use that comes with his religious beliefs.

The court annulled a 16-month jail sentence the defendant was given in 2004, defense lawyer Caterina Calia said.
[...]

Calia said she had not seen the court’s official explanation, deposited in court offices Thursday, for its ruling, so she declined to give details.

But Italian news organizations quoted widely from the court document.

Rastafarians “use marijuana not only as a medicinal … but also as a possible way to obtain the psycho-physical state contemplation aims for during prayer,” Turin daily La Stampa quoted the document as saying. “Belonging to that religion … followers (must) use the sacred grass daily, up to 10 grams (0.35 ounces) a day for person.”

Rastafarians worship Ethiopia’s last emperor, Haile Selassie, who died in 1975, as a god. They preach unity with nature and smoke marijuana as a sacrament.

The Italian Health Ministry described the ruling as “disturbing.”

- Source: Rasta smoker wins Italian case on religious grounds, AP, via USAToday.com, July 11, 2008 — Summarized by Religion News Blog



Marijuana use in Rastafarian worship


Marijuana is regarded as a herb of religious significance. It is used in Rastafari reasoning sessions, which are communal meetings involving meditation.

According to Leonard Barrett, Rastafarians first began using Marijuana in reaction to the treatment of blacks in society. It became a reactionary device to enable freedom from the establishment. (Leonard Barrett, The Rastafarians, The Dreadlocks of Jamaica p. 129)

Marijuana is used by Rastafarians to heighten feelings of community and to produce visions of a religious and calming nature.

Rastafarians are unlikely to refer to the substance as marijuana; they usually describe it as the wisdom weed or the holy herb.

The latter name is used because Rastafarians believe that marijuana use is sacred, following biblical texts justifying its use:

He causeth the grass for the cattle, and herb for the services of man.Psalm 104:14

…thou shalt eat the herb of the field.Genesis 3.18

…eat every herb of the land.Exodus 10:12

Better is a dinner of herb where love is, than a stalled ox and hatred therewith.Proverbs 15:17


The use of marijuana is a highly ritualised act, and before it is used a prayer is uttered by all:

Glory be to the father and to the maker of creation. As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be World without end: Jah Rastafari: Eternal God Selassie I.

The marijuana is rolled into a cigarette or placed into a chillum pipe. When smoked it is inhaled deeply, then held, as the devotee enters into a trance-like state.
Federal Court Hears Rastafarian Case
(c) Honolulu Star Bulletin, Nov. 6, 2001
Rosemarie Bernardo, rbernardo@starbulletin.com
Please read the above article at the Honolulu Star Bulletin's web site. It is also archived below.

Rastafarians smoke marijuana in a rite as common as communion for Catholics, an attorney of the American Civil Liberties Union said after a first-of-its-kind hearing before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"Marijuana is a common necessary sacrament to the Rastafarian religion," said Graham Boyd, director of the ACLU's Drug Policy Litigation Project.

At a hearing in the 9th Circuit courtroom in Honolulu yesterday, ACLU attorneys argued a Guam resident's right to smoke marijuana. The territory of Guam is trying to overturn territorial court rulings dismissing criminal charges against Benny Toves Guerrero.

This is the first case of its kind to be heard by any federal court, Boyd said.

According to Boyd, Guerrero was returning to Guam from Hawaii on Jan. 2, 1991. Upon arrival at the A.B. Won Pat Guam International Airport, custom officials became suspicious after observing Guerrero carrying a book on Rastafarianism and marijuana. Officials searched his bag and discovered a seven-ounce bag of marijuana. Guerrero, whose Rastafarian name is Ras Iyah Ben Makhana, was arrested and charged with importation of a controlled substance.

Guerrero moved to dismiss his indictment, stating prosecution violated his right to exercise his religion under the Constitution of Guam and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.

A lower court agreed. On Sept. 8, 2000, the Supreme Court of Guam ruled the use of marijuana by a Rastafarian for religious purposes is protected under the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution of Guam. The Guam government then appealed the ruling to the 9th Circuit.

Guerrero, who is in his mid-40s, has been a follower of Rastafarianism for 19 years, Boyd said.

Rastafarianism originated in Jamaica. Followers of the Rastafarian religion smoke marijuana for spiritual purposes and as a sacrament of their faith.

Guam should be allowed to guarantee individuals the right to use marijuana for religious purposes without fear of federal interference, Boyd said.

"If he loses his case, it will really affect him from practicing his religion ... We're a religious, diverse nation and one of the cornerstones of democracy is tolerance," he said.

At the hearing, ACLU attorney Nelson Tebbe said federal courts have historically recognized the competence of territorial supreme courts to rule on matters of local tradition and culture.

"Rastafarianism is a legitimate religion," he added. "Our client Ras Makhana is a devout adherent to this religion, and the use of marijuana as a sacrament is necessary for the practice of his faith. Guam's high court is best suited to understand and appreciate the unique customs of its people."

"There is a question of whether federal court is going to interfere with the Guam court," Boyd said. "It's time to allow Guam courts to make their own decisions concerning Guam laws."

Boyd said Guam's argument is that its Bill of Rights does not protect Guerrero's religious freedom.

Tricia Ada, who is representing Guam, could not be reached for comment.

Three judges of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals are expected to issue a ruling on the case in three to six months.

May 29, 2002

Federal Court Rules in Rastafarian Case

In an opinion issued Tuesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, some marijuana-using Rastafarians may be protected under a religious-freedom law passed by Congress in 1993.
The case began in 1991 when Benny Guerrero, returning from a trip to Hawaii, was stopped by officials at Guam's international airport. Mr. Guerrero evidently attracted the eyes of authority because he was carrying a book about Rastafarianism and marijuana. A search of Guerrero's luggage turned up five ounces of marijuana and some Cannabis seeds. He was arrested and charged with importation of a controlled substance.

In his defense, Guerrero argued that he was a practicing Rastafarian and that his use of marijuana was religious. His importation of the herb was, he argued, protected under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law that blocks the federal government from unjustifiably infringing on a person's practice of religion.

After litigating the case for more than ten years, the Ninth Circuit ruled on Tuesday that while the Religious Freedom Restoration Act might protect some Rastafarians who possess or smoke marijuana as part of their religious practices, it does not protect the importation of marijuana, even if that marijuana was intended for religious use. According to the Ninth Circuit, while the practice of Rastafarianism sanctions the smoking of marijuana, nowhere does the religion sanction the importation of marijuana.

As Guerrero's lawyer Graham Boyd pointed out in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, the court's ruling was "equivalent to saying wine is a necessary sacrament for some Christians but you have to grow your own grapes."

The ruling also has much in common with the current situation facing people, such as AIDS and Crohn's Disease patients, who find that marijuana alleviates some of their pain and provides other medical benefits such as increasing their appetite. Although eight states now permit citizens to use marijuana for medicinal purposes with the approval of their doctor, the federal government has loudly stated its intention to criminally prosecute anyone who dares to supply a sick person with medical marijuana. Thus, people whose health is already compromised are forced to shovel dirt and labor over a Cannabis garden, or make friends with a marijuana dealer.

According to the latest Household Survey on Drug Abuse, over 16 million Americans used an illegal drug in the last 30 days. The overwhelming majority of these people, just like the overwhelming majority of people who use legal drugs, did so responsibly and without problems. Some of those people may find that their use of an illegal drug occasioned a religious experience, and others may find that use of an illegal drug provided pain relief that they have been unable to achieve by any other means. To the extent that the vast majority of these 16 million Americans used an illegal drug without causing harm to others, our criminal justice system ought to leave them alone and instead focus on protecting us from dangerous criminals.

Instead, the government has just requested over 19 billion dollars of tax-payer money to fight yet another year of the "war on drugs" and it's not about to let religion, medicine, or basic human rights, for that matter, stand in its way.

Lost in the haze of its zero-tolerance prohibition policy, and drunk on its hyperbolic rhetoric about how marijuana leads you through the Devil's gateway, the government continues to flex its weary muscles in an antiquated effort to save as many souls from damnation as possible.

Enough is Enough.

Richard Glen Boire is legal counsel for the Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics.

Resources:

Ninth Circuit's Opinion in Guam v. Guerrero

The ACLU's legal briefs and press releases in Guam v. Guerrero

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act






​

Thomas Jefferson a man above men.....or was he?

Thomas Jefferson a man above men.....or was he?



This is amazing.
There are two parts.
Be sure to read the 2nd part (in RED).







Thomas Jefferson was a very remarkable man who started learning very early in life and never stopped.







At 5, began studying under his cousin's tutor.







At 9, studied Latin, Greek and French.







At 14, studied classical literature and additional languages.







At 16, entered the College of William and Mary.







At 19, studied Law for 5 years starting under George Wythe.







At 23, started his own law practice.







At 25, was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses.







At 31, wrote the widely circulated "Summary View of the Rights of British America and retired from his law practice.







At 32, was a Delegate to the Second Continental Congress.







At 33, wrote the Declaration of Independence .







At 33, took three years to revise Virginia 's legal code and wrote a Public Education bill and a statute for Religious Freedom.







At 36, was elected the second Governor of Virginia , succeeding Patrick Henry.







At 40, served in Congress for two years.







At 41, was the American minister to France , and negotiated commercial treaties with European nations along with Ben Franklin and John Adams.







At 46, served as the first Secretary of State under George Washington.







At 53, served as Vice President and was elected president of the American Philosophical Society.







At 55, drafted the Kentucky Resolutions, and became the active head of Republican Party.







At 57, was elected the third president of the United States .







At 60, obtained the Louisiana Purchase , doubling the nation's size.







At 61, was elected to a second term as President.







At 65, retired to Monticello .







At 80, helped President Monroe shape the Monroe Doctrine.







At 81, almost single-handedly created the University of Virginia , and served as its first president.







At 83, died on the 50th anniversary of the Signing of the Declaration of Independence, along with John Adams







Thomas Jefferson knew because he himself studied the previous failed attempts at government. He understood actual history, the nature of God, his laws and the nature of man. That happens to be way more than what most understand today. Jefferson really knew his stuff. A voice from the past to lead us in the future:







John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the white House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement: "This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."







"When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe ." -- Thomas Jefferson







"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."







-- Thomas Jefferson







"It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world."







-- Thomas Jefferson







"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." -- Thomas Jefferson







"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." -- Thomas Jefferson







"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson







"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."







-- Thomas Jefferson







"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson







"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."







-- Thomas Jefferson







Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:







"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.







If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Can Socialism of a one world government work?

This is one of the best explanations on why Socialism just doesn't work!


-Very Profound

This man is truly a genius?

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had
never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire
class. That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that
no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class
on Obama's plan"..
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade
so no one would fail and no one would receive an A....
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.
The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied
little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who
studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard
decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame
and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study
for the benefit of anyone else.
All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that
socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great,
the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the
reward
away, no one will try or want to succeed.
Could not be any simpler than that.
Remember, there is a test coming up. The 2012
elections.

Top US Court Rules That Citizens Can Videotape Police

There’s been a long rash of arrests over recording police officers on duty; recording that floods the internet with footage of police abuse. The First Circuit Court of Appeals made an important decision last week to reaffirm the right to videotape police on duty.

In a similar story, the ACLU recently won a $48,500 settlement of a lawsuit from a man who was arrested in 2009 for videotaping the police arresting his friend. The ACLU brought the case to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals and the charges against the man were dropped.

Gee, courts, thanks for the permission to use our first amendment rights!

~Health Freedoms




First Circuit Court of Appeals Rules that Citizens Can Videotape Police

The filming of government officials while on duty is protected by the First Amendment, said the Court

The First Circuit Court of Appeals reached a crucial decision last Friday allowing the public to videotape police officers while they’re on the clock.

The decision comes after a string of incidents where individuals have videotaped police officers and were arrested. Police officers across the United States believed citizens didn’t have the right to videotape them as they conducted official duties, but issues like police brutality put the issue up for debate.

One instance where a citizen was arrested for videotaping an officer was when Khaliah Fitchette, a law-abiding teenager from New Jersey, boarded a bus in Newark. Two police officers boarded the bus as well to remove a drunken man. Fitchette began taping the police officers because of how they were handling the man, and a police officer instructed her to stop recording them. When Fitchette refused, she was arrested and placed in the back of a cop car for two hours while the officers took her phone to delete the video. Fitchette was then released, but she and her mother then filed suit against the Newark Police Department with the New Jersey chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Another example involves Simon Glik, a passerby on the Boston Common. He used his cell phone to tape police officers when the Boston police were punching a man. Citizens surrounding the scene were saying, “You’re hurting him.” Glik never interfered with the police officers’ actions, but recorded the entire incident. The police officers ended up charging Glik with violating a wiretap statute that prohibits secret recording, even though the police officers admitted that they knew Glik was recording them. He was also charged with disturbing the peace and aiding the escape of a prisoner.

While all charges against Glik were dropped due to lack of merit, he still decided to join forces with the ACLU and file a civil rights suit to prevent a similar incident from occurring with others.

On Friday, August 26, 2011, the First Circuit Court of Appeals, which is New England’s highest federal court just below the U.S. Supreme Court, ruled that citizens are allowed to videotape law officials while they conduct official duties.

The city’s attorneys made the argument that police officers should have been exempt from a civil rights lawsuit in the first place in this case because the law is unclear as to whether there’s a “constitutionally protected right to videotape police” conducting their daily duties in public.

“The filming of government officials engaged in their duties in a public place, including police officers performing their responsibilities, fits comfortably within these principles [of protected First Amendment activity].,” said the Court. “Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting the free discussion of governmental affairs.”

The Court added that the police officers should have understood this all along, and that videotaping public officials is not limited to the press.

“Moreover, changes in technology and society have made the lines between private citizen and journalist exceedingly difficult to draw,” the Court continued. “The proliferation of electronic devices with video-recording capability means that many of our images of current events come from bystanders with a ready cell phone or digital camera rather than a traditional film crew, and news stories are now just as likely to be broken by a blogger at her computer as a reporter at a major newspaper. Such developments make clear why the news-gathering protections of the First Amendment cannot turn on professional credentials or status.”

The Court concluded that police officers are to expect to deal with certain “burdens” as citizens practice First Amendment rights, but that there needs to be a healthy balance between police officers being videotaped while acting irresponsibly and the harassment of officers with recording devices while they’re conducting their duties responsibly.

Sources:

http://www.dailytech.com/First+Circuit+Court+of+Appeals+Rules+that+Citizens+Can+Videotape+Police/article22587.htm

Government released update on cancer treatments using medical cannabis

Cannabis Science, Inc. (OTCBB:CBIS), a pioneering US biotech company developing pharmaceutical cannabis products, is pleased to report a government released update on cancer treatments using medical cannabis (marijuana)



The websites cancer.gov Page 1, updated March 17, 2011, summarizing how the treatment of cancer with cannabinoids goes beyond the simple treatment of symptoms and side effects by exhibiting possible direct antitumor activities.


“In the practice of integrative oncology, the health care provider may recommend medicinal Cannabis not only for symptom management but also for its possible direct antitumor effect.”

This summary contains the following key information:
•Cannabis has been used for medicinal purposes for thousands of years prior to its current status as an illegal substance.
•Chemical components of Cannabis, called cannabinoids, activate specific receptors found throughout the body to produce pharmacologic effects, particularly in the central nervous system and the immune system.
•Cannabinoids may have benefits in the treatment of cancer-related side effects.
•The potential benefits of medicinal Cannabis for people living with cancer include antiemetic effects, appetite stimulation, pain relief, and improved sleep.
• Though no relevant surveys of practice patterns exist, it appears that physicians caring for cancer patients who prescribe medicinal Cannabis predominantly do so for symptom management.
•Unlike other commonly used drugs, cannabinoids are stored in adipose tissue and excreted at a low rate (half-life 1–3 days).
•Even abrupt cessation of cannabinoid intake is not associated with rapid declines in plasma concentrations that would precipitate severe or abrupt withdrawal symptoms or drug cravings.

Robert Melamede, Ph.D., Cannabis Science’s CEO stated, “As we’ve previously reported, one of the most interesting findings that has emerged since the discovery of the endocannabinoid system (marijuana like compounds produced by humans, and all vertebrates) is that cannabinoids have profound cancer-killing and anti-metastatic properties. There is strong scientific support, demonstrated in tissue culture and animal studies, of the potent cancer killing properties of cannabinoids for such deadly cancers as glioma, lung cancer, breast and prostate cancer, leukemias and lymphomas, and as well as skin cancers.

Currently the federal government prohibitionist position on cannabis is hindering the medical community by delaying vitally important clinical cannabis research. I was quite elated when I recently saw that the NCI posted on their webpage “In the practice of integrative oncology, the health care provider may recommend medicinal Cannabis not only for symptom management but also for its possible direct antitumor effect.” I foolishly thought that finally there would be official recognition of the modern peer reviewed science that shows the cancer killing properties of cannabinoids. Sadly, this statement was removed, without comment, within hours of its posting.”

Dr. Melamede goes on to say “Clinical trials are desperately needed. Cannabis Science is actively working on arrangements that will allow us to perform the necessary clinical trials to verify, or not, the numerous anecdotal reports demonstrating what appears to be cancer cures. These observations are occurring with greater frequency since numerous states have legalized the medical use of cannabis. Cannabis in various forms has been used by different cultures for thousands of years as a viable medicine for numerous ailments. In fact, some biblical translations even indicate that cannabis (keneh bosem) was a component of the “Holy Anointing Oil.” Current cannabis science simply provides evidence that supports the widespread historical use of oral, cannabis-based medicines that was driven by it’s success in treating illnesses.”

The cat finally got out of the bag!!!

This article is a continuation of the non-payment of council tax saga... now in its 3rd year.

The story so far: The council have demanded council tax from me, which I have refused to pay for 3 years - on the grounds that there is no lawfully enforceable contract between me (Roger Hayes) and the council. The council is refusing to provide me with a lawful contract because they think they have the right to demand that I pay council tax... which they do not. I am happy to pay my council tax – but only when the Council has agreed to provide me with a lawful contract... this is my right. The benefit of a contract is that it makes the council agree terms and conditions with me and prevents them acting in an arbitrary fashion i.e. it brings power back to the people.

The fact is that the council has no right to demand council tax from me (Roger Hayes) - but they DO have the right to demand it from the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES... but that isn’t me. If readers are not familiar with the legal fiction – please refer to previous articles or the UK Column web site www.ukcolumn.org.

On the 11th January 2011 in the county court of Birkenhead, in front of witnesses, the court conceded to the right of Roger Hayes to act as ‘third party representative’ for MR ROGER HAYES. In essence the court agreed that they they were two entirely separate entities. This is an extraordinary development to put it very mildly.

The court did not however concede without putting up a very vigorous fight... this is how events unfolded in the court room.

Judge: Can we first find out who is in the court... is MR ROGER HAYES in the court?

Me: Sir, I am third party representative for MR ROGER HAYES.

Judge: Are you MR ROGER HAYES?

Me: No sir, I am the third party representative for MR ROGER HAYES... you may address me as Roger.

Judge: I will not address you as Roger, I will call you MR HAYES

Me: Sir, I am not MR HAYES, the court is required to address me as I request and I request that you address me as Roger. (NOTE – court protocol dictates that a defendant or respondent can be addressed the way they choose – the Judge then referred to me as ‘the gentleman’ but avoided referring to meas MR HAYES).

Judge: If you are not MR ROGER HAYES then I will take note that MR ROGER HAYES is not represented in court.

Me: In that case sir, you will have to also note that the council is not represented in court.

(NOTE. This would mean that the case would have to be dismissed, finding for the defendant, because the plaintiff had not appeared)

Judge: I can see that that the council has representation in the court.

Me: Then you will have to acknowledge that MR ROGER HAYES has representation in the court. We are all equal in the eyes of the law... if council has third party representation then so does MR ROGER HAYES. The council is a corporation and so is MR ROGER HAYES.

Judge: MR ROGER HAYES is not a corporation.

Me: Yes it is.

Judge: No it isn’t, it is a PERSON.

Me: A PERSON is a corporation.

Judge No it isn’t.

Me: Define person.

Judge: I don’t have to.

Me: Then let me do it for you sir. A PERSON is a corporation (NOTE: This is defined in a law dictionary) Sir, are you familiar with the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666?

Judge: I am familiar with many laws.

Me: Sir, I asked if you were familiar with the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666, if you are not Sir, then with respect you are not competent to judge in this matter and that gives rise to a claim of denial of due process.

Judge: Let’s hear from the council.

Me: Sir we can only move on to the council’s presentation when the court has confirmed that MR ROGER HAYES is represented in court.

Judge: Fine.

And the case continued.... with me (Roger Hayes) acting as third party representative for the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES and with the judge eventually telling the council to go away and prove its case. The Judge was obviously very keen to avoid a charge of denial of due process i.e. a challenge to his competence. It was much easier for him to side with me and pass the buck back to the council.

Smart judge.

So what does this all mean? Well In very simple terms, it is SEISMIC i.e. extremely significant. It means that the court has accepted that the council’s claim is against the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES and not me the flesh and blood man Roger Hayes. The court has also accepted that I (Roger Hayes) can act as a third party representative to defend the claim against MR ROGER HAYES.
The legal fiction cat is now truly out of the bag (although for me this is the second time I have achieved this in court). If the council goes on to win its case, then the court will find against the legal fiction MR ROGER HAYES, but significantly, they will not have found against me Roger Hayes... because as the court agrees... MR ROGER HAYES is a corporation... which isn’t me. One important thing is now clearly established - I, Roger Hayes, am not liable for council tax. AND NEITHER ARE YOU.

Marijuana For Hard-To-Treat Brain Cancer

Marijuana, commonly known as Gandia can be used to treat really advanced stage brain cancer according to a recent scientific study by scientists of the Complutense University, Spain. Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is highly resistant to current anticancer treatments, which necessitates finding of new therapeutic strategies to improve the poor prognosis of patients suffering from this disease.



Medical Marijuana Plant
It was discovered that Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is an active ingredient of marijuana as well as other cannabinoid receptor agonists, inhibits tumor growth in animal models of cancer, including glioma. This particular effect relies partly on the stimulation of autophagy-mediated apoptosis in tumor cells. Thus the combined administration of THC and temozolomide (TMZ; the benchmark agent for the management of GBM) produces a strong anti-tumoral action in glioma xenografts. This effect is also observed in tumors that are resistant to TMZ treatment.

Administration of submaximal doses of THC and cannabidiol (CBD (a plant-derived cannabinoid that also induces glioma cell death through a mechanism of action different from that of THC) remarkably reduces the growth of glioma xenografts. Treatment with TMZ and submaximal doses of THC and CBD produces a strong antitumoral action in both TMZ-sensitive and TMZ-resistant tumors.

Abovementioned findings by investigators at Complutense University in Spain prove that the combined administration of TMZ and cannabinoids could be thus therapeutically exploited for the management of GBM. The combined administration of THC and the pharmaceutical agent temozolomide (TMZ) therefore establishes strong anti-cancer activity in brain tumors which become resistant to conventional anti-cancer treatments.

The authors of these investigations have accordingly derived that the administration of THC in combination with TMZ “enhanced autophagy” (programmed cell death) in malignant tissue. According to them, “The combined administration of THC, CBD, and TMZ remarkably reduced the growth of glioma xenografts … [and] produced a strong antitumoral action in both TMZ-sensitive and TMZ-resistant tumors. Altogether, our findings support that the combined administration of TMZ and cannabinoids could be therapeutically exploited for the management of GBM (gliobastoma multiforme).”

Earlier in the year 2006 a study was published in the British Journal of Cancer. This study had reported that the intra-tumoural administration of THC is associated with reduced tumor cell proliferation in two out of nine human subjects with GBM (which is highly resistant to conventional anti-cancer treatments).

Separate preclinical studies which assessed the anti-cancer activity of cannabinoids and endocannabinoids also show that these substances can inhibit the proliferation of various types of cancerous cells which includes breast carcinoma, prostate carcinoma, colorectal carcinoma, gastric adenocarcinoma, skin carcinoma, leukemia cells, neuroblastoma, lung carcinoma, uterus carcinoma, thyroid epithelioma, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, cervical carcinoma, oral cancerbiliary tract cancer and lymphoma.

These studies have proved beyond doubt that marijuana ingredient THC is set to play a major role in combating GBM that has already become resistant to conventional anti-cancer drugs. Indeed a ray of new hope for the cancer patients!

A few links to expose the bondage of your energy at birth so you can see a trail

This Federal Reserve comment fits with the Surety your parents registered with your birth...You are the surety and once delivered to the registry it is considered a pledge...http://www.frbservices.org/serviceofferings/treasury/collateral_services.html

This alignes with the Canadian Ownership Control and Determination Act
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-20/
and it's regulations Schedule 2

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-84-431/page-19.html#h-44
and this one for making request for an audit of the strawman legal fiction entity with your name reversed and in all caps like on your drivers licence//

THe Provinces and the Country are coorporatiosn trading on the stock exchange. For profit Businesses! http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html
Type in allcapital letters THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001463559&owner=exclude&count=40
Then CANADA
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?company=CANADA&match=&CIK=&filenum=&State=&Country=&SIC=&owner=exclude&Find=Find+Companies&action=getcompany
Then THE CITY OF EDMONTON or your city
here http://www.dnb.com/
Can corporate law bind flesh and blood women to it's business profits?
This one kind of explains a bit more so you will start to see what has happened...http://allcreatorsgifts.blogsp​ot.com/2011/02/to-whom-your-ch​ildren-belongare-they.html
you can contact me at owlmon@gmail.com anytime you have questions or go to my youtube channel owlmon..Blessings

Repeal of Pot laws on hold till fall

Medical marijuana law gets reprieve 59
First posted: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 7:03:05 EDT PM

Matthew Mernagh, left, and his lawyer Paul Lewin oustside the Court of Appeal on Wednesday.

TORONTO - The troubled federal medical marijuana program was granted a reprieve until this fall when a constitutional challenge will be heard at the Ontario Court of Appeal.

Justice Donald Taliano ruled the marijuana program unconstitutional two months ago and gave Ottawa until mid-July to repair the Medical Marijuana Access Regulations (MMRA) or pot would be effectively legalized in Ontario.

Doctors’ “overwhelming refusal to participate in the medicinal marijuana program completely undermines the effectiveness of the program,” Taliano wrote in his ruling.

Federal government lawyer Kevin Wilson asked for and received an extension of that stay until Ontario’s highest court could hear the appeal, likely in November.

Justice Robert Blair of the Court of Appeal agreed to continue the stay beyond mid-July, saying “irreparable harm” could ensue if he didn’t grant it.

“The practical effect of the decision if the suspension were permitted to expire on July 14 would be to legalize marijuana production in Ontario, if not across Canada,” Blair said.

“And it will invalidate many ongoing prosecutions involving commercial marijuana productions and possession offences before the appeal,” Blair told a courtroom packed with supporters of Taliano’s judgment.

“While most people in the courtroom today would applaud such a result, there is much debate about this issue in this society, including about the pros and cons as to whether marijuana is a harmless but valuable therapeutic substance or whether its consumption has harmful effects that may outweigh those considerations in the absence of a controlled regime,” Blair said.

Taliano was ruling on the case of a St. Catharines man, Matthew Mernagh, 37, who was charged with growing his own pot to treat his fibromyalgia, scoliosis, seizures and depression.

Marijuana “works best” for his pain without the harmful side effects of other medications, he said Thursday.

Mernagh and 22 other people stricken with “serious, debilitating and painful” conditions couldn’t find doctors who were “prepared to participate” in the medical marijuana program, said Mernagh’s lawyer Paul Lewin. “These people are being forced into the arms of the black market.”

Cannabis and the Brain

Cannabis and the Brain: A User's Guide
by Paul Armentano
by Paul Armentano


Preclinical data recently published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation demonstrating that cannabinoids may spur brain cell growth has reignited the international debate regarding the impact of marijuana on the brain. However, unlike previous pseudo-scientific campaigns that attempted to link pot smoking with a litany of cognitive abnormalities, modern research suggests what many cannabis enthusiasts have speculated all along: ganja may be good for you.

Cannabinoids & Neurogenesis

"Study turns pot wisdom on its head," pronounced the Globe and Mail in October. News wires throughout North America and the world touted similar headlines — all of which were met with a monumental silence from federal officials and law enforcement. Why all the fuss? Researchers at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon found that the administration of synthetic cannabinoids in rats stimulated the proliferation of newborn neurons (nerve cells) in the hippocampus region of the brain and significantly reduced measures of anxiety and depression-like behavior. The results shocked researchers — who noted that almost all other so-called "drugs of abuse," including alcohol and tobacco, decrease neurogenesis in adults — and left the "pot kills brain cells" crowd with a platter of long-overdue egg on their faces.

While it would be premature to extrapolate the study's findings to humans, at a minimum, the data reinforce the notion that cannabinoids are unusually non-toxic to the brain and that even long-term use of marijuana likely represents little risk to brain function. The findings also offer further evidence that cannabinoids can play a role in the alleviation of depression and anxiety, and that cannabis-based medicines may one day offer a safer alternative to conventional anti-depressant pharmaceuticals such as Paxil and Prozac.

(Reference: Cannabinoids promote embryonic and adult hippocampus neurogenesis and produce anxiolytic and depressant-like effects. The Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2005)

Cannabis & Neuroprotection

Not only has modern science refuted the notion that marijuana is neurotoxic, recent scientific discoveries have indicated that cannabinoids are, in fact, neuroprotective, particularly against alcohol-induced brain damage. In a recent preclinical study — the irony of which is obvious to anyone who reads it — researchers at the US National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) reported that the administration of the non-psychoactive cannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) reduced ethanol-induced cell death in the brain by up to 60 percent. "This study provides the first demonstration of CBD as an in vivo neuroprotectant ... in preventing binge ethanol-induced brain injury," the study's authors wrote in the May 2005 issue of the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. Alcohol poisoning is linked to hundreds of preventable deaths each year in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control, while cannabis cannot cause death by overdose.

Of course, many US neurologists have known about cannabis' neuroprotective prowess for years. NIMH scientists in 1998 first touted the ability of natural cannabinoids to stave off the brain-damaging effects of stroke and acute head trauma. Similar findings were then replicated by investigators in the Netherlands and Italy and, most recently, by a Japanese research in 2005. However, attempts to measure the potential neuroprotective effects of synthetic cannabinoid-derived medications in humans have so far been inconclusive.

(References: Comparison of cannabidiol, antioxidants and diuretics in reversing binge ethanol-induced neurotoxicity. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. 2005 | Cannabidiol prevents cerebral infarction. Stroke. 2005 | Post-ischemic treatment with cannabidiol prevents electroencephalographic flattening, hyperlocomotion and neuronal injury in gerbils. Neuroscience Letters. 2003 | Neuroprotection by Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol, the main active compound in marijuana, against ouabain-induced in vivo excitotoxicity. Journal of Neuroscience. 2001 | Cannabidiol and Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol are neuroprotective antioxidants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1998)

Cannabinoids and Glioma

Of all cancers, few are as aggressive and deadly as glioma. Glioma tumors quickly invade healthy brain tissue and are typically unresponsive to surgery and standard medical treatments. One agent they do respond to is cannabis.

Writing in the August 2005 issue of the Journal of Neurooncology, investigators at the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute reported that the administration of THC on human glioblastoma multiforme cell lines decreased the proliferation of malignant cells and induced apoptosis (programmed cell death) more rapidly than did the administration of the synthetic cannabis receptor agonist, WIN-55,212-2. Researchers also noted that THC selectively targeted malignant cells while ignoring healthy ones in a more profound manner than the synthetic alternative. Patients diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme typically die within three months without therapy.

Previous research conducted in Italy has also demonstrated the capacity of CBD to inhibit the growth of glioma cells both in vitro (e.g., a petri dish) and in animals in a dose dependent manner. As a result, a Spanish research team is currently investigating whether the intracranial administration of cannabinoids can prolong the lives of patients diagnosed with inoperable brain cancer.

Most recently, a scientific analysis in the October issue of the journal Mini-Reviews in Medicinal Chemistry noted that, in addition to THC and CBD's brain cancer-fighting ability, studies have also shown cannabinoids to halt the progression of lung carcinoma, leukemia, skin carcinoma, colectoral cancer, prostate cancer and breast cancer.

(References: Cannabinoids selectively inhibit proliferation and induce cell death of cultured human glioblastoma multiforme cells. Journal of Neurooncology. 2005 | Cannabinoids and cancer. Mini-Reviews in Medicinal Chemistry. 2005 | Anti-tumor effects of cannabidiol, a non-psychotropic cannabinoid, on human glioma cell lines. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. 2003)

Cannabinoids & Neurodegeneration

Emerging evidence also indicates that cannabinoids may play a role in slowing the progression of certain neurodegenerative diseases, such as Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (a.k.a. Lou Gehrig's Disease). Recent animal studies have shown cannabinoids to delay disease progression and inhibit neurodegeneration in mouse models of ALS, Parkinson's, and MS. As a result, the Journal of Neurological Sciences recently pronounced, "There is accumulating evidence ... to support the hypothesis that the cannabinoid system can limit the neurodegenerative processes that drive progressive disease," and patient trials investigating whether the use of oral THC and cannabis extracts may slow the progression of MS are now underway in the United Kingdom.

(References: Cannabinoids and neuroprotection in CNS inflammatory disease. Journal of the Neurological Sciences. 2005. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: delayed disease progression in mice by treatment with a cannabinoid. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Other Motor Neuron Disorders. 2004 |Cannabinoids inhibit neurodegeneration in models of multiple sclerosis. Brain. 2003)

Cannabis & Cognition

But what about claims of cannabis' damaging effect of cognition? A review of the scientific literature indicates that rumors regarding the "stoner stupid" stereotype are unfounded. According to clinical trial data published this past spring in the American Journal of Addictions, cannabis use — including heavy, long-term use of the drug — has, at most, only a negligible impact on cognition and memory. Researchers at Harvard Medical School performed magnetic resonance imaging on the brains of 22 long-term cannabis users (reporting a mean of 20,100 lifetime episodes of smoking) and 26 controls (subjects with no history of cannabis use). Imaging displayed "no significant differences" between heavy cannabis smokers compared to controls, the study found.

Previous trials tell a similar tale. An October 2004 study published in the journal Psychological Medicine examining the potential long-term residual effects of cannabis on cognition in monozygotic male twins reported "an absence of marked long-term residual effects of marijuana use on cognitive abilities." A 2003 meta-analysis published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society also "failed to reveal a substantial, systematic effect of long-term, regular cannabis consumption on the neurocognitive functioning of users who were not acutely intoxicated," and a 2002 clinical trial published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal determined, "Marijuana does not have a long-term negative impact on global intelligence."

Finally, a 2001 study published in the journal Archives of General Psychiatry found that long-term cannabis smokers who abstained from the drug for one week "showed virtually no significant differences from control subjects (those who had smoked marijuana less than 50 times in their lives) on a battery of 10 neuropsychological tests." Investigators further added, "Former heavy users, who had consumed little or no cannabis in the three months before testing, [also] showed no significant differences from control subjects on any of these tests on any of the testing days."

(References: Lack of hippocampal volume change in long-term heavy cannabis users. American Journal of Addictions. 2005 | Neuropsychological consequences of regular marijuana use: a twin study. Psychological Medicine. 2004 | Non-acute (residual) neurocognitive effects of cannabis use: A meta-analytic study. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2003 | Current and former marijuana use: preliminary findings of a longitudinal study of effects on IQ in young adults. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2002 | Neuropsychological Performance in Long-term Cannabis Users. Archives of General Psychiatry. 2001)

Links to the abstracts or full text to the studies cited in this article are available here.

March 2, 2006

Paul Armentano [send him mail] is the senior policy analyst for the NORML Foundation in Washington, DC.

Copyright © 2006 LewRockwell.com

International Court cases the Jehovahs Witnesses set precedent with

Supreme Court cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses


Jehovah's Witnesses

About Jehovah's Witnesses
Demographics

History

Organizational Structure

Governing Body
Faithful and Discreet Slave
Legal Instruments

Government Interactions

Beliefs
Doctrines • Practices

Eschatology
Blood • Disfellowshipping

Persecution

Controversy

Related People
Formative Influences
William Miller • N.H. Barbour
Jonas Wendell

Presidents & Members
List of Jehovah's Witnesses
C.T. Russell • M.G. Henschel
J.F. Rutherford • F.W. Franz
D.A. Adams • N.H. Knorr

Ex-Members & Critics
R. Franz • E.C. Gruss


Internationally there have been numerous Supreme Court cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses. The cases revolve around three main subjects: freedom to practice their religion, laws requiring nationistic practices and law regarding blood transfusions.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Canada
• 2 El Salvador
• 3 Germany
• 4 India
• 5 Japan
• 6 Philippines
• 7 Russia
• 8 United States
• 9 References
• 10 External links
Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada has made a number of important decisions concerning Jehovah's Witnesses. These include the striking down of Quebec's Padlock Law and other anti-Witness laws in the 1950s and more recent cases dealing with whether Witness parents had the right to decide what medical treatment was in the best interest of their children based on their faith.
[edit] El Salvador
In 1998, El Salvador's Supreme Court of Justice recently struck down a Social Security Hospital rule that required patients to donate blood in order to receive medical treatment. Previously, hospital policy called for all patients to provide two units of blood prior to a surgical procedure. After this, those who wish to receive medical treatment in the Social Security Hospital have the legal right to choose not to give blood.
[edit] Germany
In December of 2000, Germany's Supreme court ruled that Jehovah's Witnesses did not have to pass a test of "loyalty to the state", laying the foundation for greater freedoms of worship for German citizens.
[edit] India
In November 1985, Jehovah's Witnesses' children in the state of Kerala refused to sing the national anthem, and were dismissed from schools. V. J. Emmanuel, whose children Binu Mol and Bindu were expelled from school, appealed to the Supreme Court of India for legal remedy. In August 11, 1986, it overruled the Kerala High Court, and stated: "Our tradition teaches tolerance, our philosophy teaches tolerance, our Constitution practices tolerance, let us not dilute it."
[edit] Japan
On March 8, 1996, the Supreme Court of Japan ruled that Kobe Municipal Industrial Technical College violated the law by expelling Kunihito Kobayashi for his refusal to participate in Kendo lessons. He felt that these drills were not in harmony with such Bible principles as the one found at Isaiah 2:4, which says: "They will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore." The Court's decision established a precedent for future cases.
Misae Takeda, one of Jehovah's Witnesses, was given a blood transfusion in 1992, while still under sedation following surgery to remove a malignant tumor of the liver. On February 29, 2000, the four judges of the Supreme Court unanimously decided that doctors were at fault because they failed to explain that they might give her a blood transfusion if deemed necessary during the operation, thus depriving her of the right to decide whether to accept the blood transfusion or not.
[edit] Philippines
In the case of Roel Ebralinag, et al. vs. Superintendent of Schools of Cebu (G.R. No. 95770; March 1, 1993)[1], the Supreme Court of the Philippines held that exemption may be accorded to the Jehovah's Witnesses with regard to the observance of the flag ceremony out of respect for their religious beliefs.
In two separate rulings in the case of Estrada vs. Escritor (A.M. No. P-02-1651; August 4, 2003[2] and June 22, 2006[3]), the Supreme Court of the Philippines effectively granted an exception to laws regarding marriage to Soledad S. Escritor because enforcement of those laws would have inhibited the free exercise of her religious beliefs as a practicing Jehova's Witness. The Supreme Court ruling in this case is a landmark ruling with far-reaching implications for the status of religious freedom in the Philippines.
[edit] Russia
After the fall of the communist block of nations in Eastern Europe and Asia, Jehovah's Witnesses were allowed to worship freely in those nations for the first time since WWII. However, recent years have seen a resurgence of political resistance to "minority" religions prompting several court cases in the Moscow courts which have led to the denial of registration for Jehovah's Witnesses in the Moscow district.
[edit] United States
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Harlan Fiske Stone wrote, "The Jehovah's Witnesses ought to have an endowment in view of the aid which they give in solving the legal problems of civil liberties."
In the United States numerous cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses are now landmark decisions of First Amendment law. In all, Jehovah's Witnesses brought 23 separate First Amendment actions before the U.S. Supreme Court between 1938 and 1946.
The most important U.S. Supreme Court legal victory won by the Witnesses was in the case West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette, in which the court ruled that school children could not be forced to pledge allegiance to or salute the U.S. flag. The Barnette decision overturned an earlier case, Minersville School District vs. Gobitis (1940), in which the court had held that Witnesses could be forced against their will to pay homage to the flag.
In a more recent case, Jehovah's Witnesses refused to get government permits to solicit door-to-door in Stratton, Ohio. In 2002, the case was heard in the U.S. Supreme Court (Watchtower Bible and Tract Society v. Village of Stratton). The Court ruled in favor of the Jehovah's Witnesses, ensuring the freedom of all to go door-to-door without obtaining permits.
[edit] References
1. ^ http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1993/mar1993/gr_95770_1993.html
2. ^ http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/aug2003/am_p_02_1651.htm
3. ^ http://www.supremecourt.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/june2006/A.M.%20No.%20P-02-1651.htm
[edit] External links