Let's Keep The History Straight

I can appreciate Cathy McMorris Rodgers attending the Armed Forces Persons of the Year Awards luncheon, but I take issue with some of her comments as reported by the Review.

McMorris Rodgers called them all “guardians of America’s freedom and the freedom of the world.”

And freedom is under attack, the 5th District Republican congresswoman said.

“Every day, our survival is threatened by radical Islamic terrorists whose aim is to kill innocent men, women and children – even at the cost of their own lives,” McMorris Rodgers said.

She said Iraq has been the “central front” in the “global war on terror,” but U.S. military efforts there have “made tremendous progress in bringing stability and democracy to that country.”

Now, McMorris Rodgers said, “if we can turn Afghanistan into a free and democratic ally as we’re trying to do, we’ll have a valued partner in our efforts to eradicate al-Qaida from the earth.”

Iraq had nothing to do with the Global War on Terror until we invaded it. Only then did it become our central front. Our invasion to prevent a future perceived threat from nonexistent weapons of mass destruction fed right into Osama bin Laden's stated belief that the US would use force, if necessary, to ensure access to oil in the Middle East. We provided a great recruiting tool for him. Had we focused directly on the original threat, who knows how much progress we could have made. Years later, bin Laden remains a threat because we diverted our attention elsewhere.

I certainly hope we can clean up the mess we made.

Young Visionaries

This morning's ride to work was a little different and little less boring than usual thanks to two high school students near North Central. In the space of 1-1/2 blocks they each took a turn at walking out into the road without looking for traffic--right in front of me. Both were shocked, startled, amazed and surprised when I almost hit them. They must have great peripheral vision for cars but poor for bikes. And bright, screaming-yellow-zonker jackets. And flashing headlights. Hey, it's not like I'm trying to sneak up on them.

Doctor Knows Best

There Is No Question

Reuters has been seeking the release of this video for almost three years. According to the original story, published in the New York Times:

The American military said in a statement late Thursday that 11 people had been killed: nine insurgents and two civilians. According to the statement, American troops were conducting a raid when they were hit by small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades. The American troops called in reinforcements and attack helicopters. In the ensuing fight, the statement said, the two Reuters employees and nine insurgents were killed.

“There is no question that coalition forces were clearly engaged in combat operations against a hostile force,” said Lt. Col. Scott Bleichwehl, a spokesman for the multinational forces in Baghdad.

Warning: This is graphic.
The video shows that to be false.

Questions to ponder. What if that were your child in the van? What if that were your child pulling the trigger?

Murder! Insanity! Death! - Hemp For Victory!

A group called Sensible Washington is seeking 241,153 valid voter signatures to get Initiative 1068, an initiative to legalize marjuana in the State of Washington, put on the ballot in November. I took a look at the text of the initiative and found these proposed changes to the Revised Code of Washington. I bolded the new language.

It removes "Manufacture, deliver, or possess with intent to deliver marijuana (RCW 69.50.401(2)(c))" from section 9.94A.518.

Changes section 69.50.101(d) from this:

(d) "Controlled substance" means a drug, substance, or immediate precursor included in Schedules I through V as set forth in federal or state laws, or federal or board rules.

to this:

(d) "Controlled substance" means a drug, substance, or immediate precursor included in Schedules I through V as set forth in federal or state laws, or federal or board rules. "Controlled substance" does not include marijuana.

Changes section 69.50.4014 from this:

Except as provided in RCW 69.50.401(2)(c), any person found guilty of possession of forty grams or less of marihuana is guilty of a misdemeanor.

to this:

Except as provided in RCW 69.50.401(2)(c), any person under eighteen years of age found guilty of possession of forty grams or less of marijuana is guilty of a misdemeanor.

This will also add new sections to Chapter 69.50:

The civil and criminal penalties relating to drug paraphernalia shall not apply to marijuana or marijuana-related offenses committed by persons eighteen years of age or older.

No seizure or forfeiture of property may result from marijuana or marijuana-related offenses committed by persons eighteen years or older.

If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected.

In the event that any sections of this Act are in conflict with any other law codified in the Revised Code of Washington, the provisions of this Act shall control.

Captions used in this chapter are not part of the law.

This act may be known and cited as the Marijuana Reform Act.

What does this mean if this becomes law in the State of Washington? Nothing if you're busted by a federal agency. The Supreme Court ruled in Gonzales v. Raich that Congress may ban the use of cannabis even where states approve its use for medicinal purposes. Well, the same holds true even if a state legalizes it.

Things would change at the state, county and local levels. The changes to law enforcement's approach would be significant since marijuana would be legal for anyone 18 or older. But I'm curious about other effects. Will Washington become a gateway for smugglers who want to move their "product" to other states or will the smuggling decrease? Well, that's a federal problem, isn't it? What will happen to the joint task forces? Will the local cops be removed from them? The United States Attorney chooses which cases to prosecute when they're offered up by local prosecutors. The number of plants being grown, size of the operation, the money involved, etc., are possible factors that play into this. What role, if any, will local prosecutors have in this should marijuana become legal? Will recommendations for prosecution at the federal level become "courtesy calls" so the feds can make the bust or will the local authorities focus on more pressing issues? Will there be a challenge to companies testing their employees for marijuana? Why doesn't this initiative address removing the medical marijuana laws since they'd become moot?

If nothing else, making marijuana legal at the state level sends a message to our federal politicians that people want this to change at the federal level, too. Personally, I'm for it.

Sensible Washington has a list of businesses you can go to to sign the petition. (Juvenile humor moment - One of the businesses in Spokane is a law firm with a web site called www.legaljoint.net. Get it? Legal joint. Huh? Legal. Joint. Get it?)

***

BTW, if you've never seen Reefer Madness, you can check it out for free on the Internet Archive. Hemp for victory!

Barefoot Running - Out Of My League

Josh and his fellow distance runners on the Mead track team had a 1500 race just for fun today. As if you could call that fun, but that's another subject. A couple days ago I asked if he'd mind if I ran, too. Not a problem as long as I didn't get in the way. (That meant I was to move aside when they were lapping me.)

Thirty minutes before we were to go to the school the weather made it look so inviting.


Josh said I should wear spikes because they'd help me run faster. I declined and went with my aqua sox.

No, I'm not intentionally trying to send a fashion statement.
I've run barefoot on the track before and found it very uncomfortable. Yesterday I did 3.5 miles in the aqua sox and it was quite nice. I did the warm-up run with the boys and that gave me a good idea of what I was in for. Their warm-up pace was a touch faster than my regular running pace. So while they're talking and joking I'm trying to keep my breathing quiet so they don't think I'm going to die. Still, they slowly pulled away from me. I only caught up when they all stopped in a grove of trees to pee. I thought it was funny that that is a regular part of their warm-up.

After stretching we formed up at the start line and I told everyone to just yell "track" if I was in the way when, not if, they passed me. At 35+ years older and being just as many pounds heavier than these high school runners I had a pretty realistic picture of how this run was going to go. And I was right. The coach yelled "Go" and we were off. In 200 meters I was already 20 meters behind. Everybody lapped me during my third and their final lap. I finished in 6:36. Josh's time was 4:15. Go Josh!