Cracks appearing in the tyranny of global oppression – Quad City Herald (blog)

Posted on by

It was only a few weeks ago that I published an opinion warning about the threat to our freedom posed by the climate change/global warming insanity.

The problem is that our government and our media have become addicted to the concept that humans are causing irreparable harm to our environment. Harm they claim will inevitably make life on earth unsustainable. For government zealots it is a perfect storm. Only government can create the regulations and laws needed to protect us from this external threat to our existence.

The result is that many uniformed and fearful subjects have fallen prey to the tyrants, government zealots and their enablers around the globe.

If the science were solid they would have case to support their position. But the science is not settled. Climate change zealots claim a consensus of scientists agree, but science is not settled by a vote. Science is settled by incontrovertible facts.

A growing number of well qualified scientists have begun to question the science. Some have even gone so far as to call it a hoax. That includes Ian Plimer, Professor Emeritus of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne, and Patrick Moore, a former President of Greenpeace. According to Wikipedia Moore holds a PhD in ecology from the University of British Columbia.

Both Plimer and Moore have been vilified as misguided individuals who have turned their back on science to become paid spokesmen for the oil industry. Notice that they do not challenge the scientific facts Plimer and Moore use to make their case against global climate change.

First of all, Plimer and Moore both say carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. In fact they both make the case that carbon dioxide levels are at the lowest level in the history of the planet. Moore says that plant life is currently on a starvation diet when it comes to carbon dioxide. He points out that many farmers today have to pump carbon dioxide into their greenhouses to encourage the plants to grow.

Years ago basic high school biology taught us that plants breath in carbon dioxide and release oxygen. The climate zealots want us to believe that we must reduce carbon dioxide by abandoning our use of fossil fuels like oil and coal. Logically, that means reducing carbon dioxide will ultimately reduce the levels of oxygen as plants begin to die.

If carbon dioxide levels were at historically high levels then the climate change folks would have a valid concern, but both Plimer and Moore dispute that underlying premise. Also, if greenhouse gasses were at historically high levels plants would be thriving without the addition of carbon dioxide as posited by Moore. Zealots ignore these serious challenges to their scientific facts.

Political talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin both pointed out this week that the programs promoted by the climate change lobby fall heaviest on the poor. Patrick Moore also has made the point that the solutions proposed by the climate change zealots hit the poor harder than the rich and powerful. Their programs result in higher energy costs, higher food costs and fewer job opportunities.

The reality is we all want a cleaner environment. We dont want polluted air or lead in the water supply. Levin says people who are better off financially are more likely to support real solutions to cleaning up our environment.

Quite frankly it is insulting when liberals accuse conservatives of destroying the planet for our children and grand children while they saddle our progeny with a debt they cannot possibly pay.

President Trump got it right when he stood up to the pressure and withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate change accord. Unfortunately he did not do it because the entire underlying global warming/climate change agenda is nothing more than an fraud perpetrated by liberal elites who want to steal your freedom.

Free, educated and industrious people can find new creative solutions to the problems that we all face. Our founding fathers understood that government rarely does. Have government solutions gotten any smarter since they wrote the constitution?

See the original post:

Cracks appearing in the tyranny of global oppression - Quad City Herald (blog)

Saudi Royals Play Donald Trump: Win Support for Oppression and War – HuffPost

Posted on by

President Donald Trump honored Saudi Arabia with his first overseas visit. After once accusing Saudi Arabia of blowing up the World Trade Center, he arrived in Riyadh bearing gifts: $110 billion in arms sales, enhanced aid for Riyadhs brutal war in Yemen, and increased political support for the royal regime.

The U.S. alliance with Saudi Arabia never reflected shared values. The royals run what is essentially a totalitarian state, respecting neither political nor religious liberty. The regime exports its brutal values, subsidizing intolerant Islamist teachings worldwide and intervening militarily in its neighbors.

Nevertheless, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia long was home to the worlds greatest oil reserves, so Washington enthusiastically embraced the regime. Despite previously criticizing the Saudis for relying on America for their defense, President Trump obsequiously addressed the monarchy. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson declared that President Trump and members of his cabinet agreed that the U.S.-Saudi partnership should be taken to new heights.

The two countries should cooperate when their interests coincide. But that doesnt justify making Riyadh a defense ward of America. Especially when at the KSAs behest the U.S. is helping kill innocent civilians in neighboring Yemen, who have done nothing against America. So far Washington has supported Riyadhs war with some $20 billion in arms and about 2000 air refueling operations, as well as targeting information.

U.S. intervention is making Americans less safe. Thomas Juneau of the University of Ottawa observed that the conflict: is at its root a civil war, driven by local competition for power, and not a regional, sectarian or proxy war. But Riyadhs aggressive war turned a local conflict into a regional sectarian struggle, drove Yemenis toward Iran, and encouraged a revival of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, which now controls an estimated third of the country. Riyadhs aggression also is morally appalling, helping kill innocents for no good geopolitical reason.

Yet the Trump administration is considering backing a plan by the United Arab Emirates to retake the Yemeni port of Hodeida. Seizing and securing the port would be more difficult than suggestedthe conflict so far has highlighted the ineffectiveness of Saudi forces. Moreover, humanitarian analysts warn that the operation could result in a humanitarian catastrophe since most of Yemens humanitarian aid goes through Hodeida. Jeremy Konyndyk, formerly at USAID, warned that this operation would take a country thats been on a knifes edge of famine for the past two years and tip it over.

Expanding Washingtons involvement also would increase Americas stake in the conflict without much improving the likelihood of a positive outcome. A top administration official told the Washington Post that ending present restrictions might be seen as a green light for direct involvement in a major war We cant judge yet what the results will be. The consequences almost certainly would be disastrous. Of course, the Saudi royals are pleased and gave President Trumpwho once accused a Saudi prince of trying to control U.S. politicians with daddys moneyan extravagant welcome.

Yemen is an ancient land at the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula. The Yemeni people never welcomed outside rule and made any would-be conqueror pay a price. Two states emerged when independence was achieved during the 1960s. They suffered internal conflict, fought each other, and suffered from foreign intervention, including from Saudi Arabia. The two Yemens eventually joined in 1990, but the reunited country spent most of its recent history in conflict and war. At one point Riyadh, now loudly denouncing Iranian meddling, backed southern secessionists.

Until recently Americas main security concern was the rise of AQAP, perhaps the terrorist groups most active affiliate. To suppress this force the U.S. relied on long-ruling Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was ousted in 2012. The ensuing national dialogue failed to deliver a political solution. He then united with the Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah (Supporters of God), a quasi-Shia political movement which battled him when he was in power.

Together in September 2014 they ousted his successor, Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, viewed as friendly to neighboring Saudi Arabia. This game of musical chairs in Sanaa was of little interest to Washington, but the KSA wanted pliant leadership in Yemen. In March 2015 Riyadh, backed by nine Arab nations, intervened in the name of confronting Iran. Yousef al-Otaiba, UAEs ambassador to the U.S., declared: Iran must not be allowed to create a Hezbollah-like proxy in Yemen through the Houthis.

But area specialists uniformly dismiss such self-serving claims. The religious identification between Iran and the Houthis always was limited. The latter are Zaydis, a liberal, Shia-related sect, which some observers say is best treated as a tribal militia. In some areas Zaydis appear closer to Sunnis than Shiites.

The relationship between Iran and Houthis always has been loose at best. Noted Adam Baron of the European Council on Foreign Relations: Its not as if the Houthis were created by Iran, and further, its not as if the Houthis are being controlled by Iran. This is a group that is rooted in local Yemeni issues. Juneau said simply: the war in Yemen is driven by local grievances and competition for power among Yemeni actors. Yezid Sayigh, of Beiruts Carnegie Middle East Center, criticized propaganda about Iranian expansionism in Yemen.

Houthis revolted against the Yemeni government, then headed by Saleh, in 2004; in 2011 they joined demonstrations that led to Salehs resignation the following year. But then Houthis joined with Saleh to confront his successor, Hadi, leading to the latters resignation in late 2014.

Iran had little to do with these events. Saleh wanted to retake control and Houthis wanted more influence, while Hadi wanted to retain control. This kind of local dispute fueled decades of conflict in Yemen. U.S. intelligence believes that Tehran counselled against the Houthis Sanaa takeover.

While Houthis accepted Irans aid, the UN figures that Tehran began transferring weapons to the Houthis in 2009, back when they were fighting then-President Saleh, now their uneasy ally. Since then most of their weapons came from the Yemens already abundant supplies and military units which had remained loyal to Saleh.

Saudi Arabias aggression left them with little choice but to look to Tehran for additional assistance. Noted Kevin L. Schwartz of the Library of Congress: Only after the onset of the Saudi-led campaign did the arming of the Houthi rebels by Iran increase. And the latter has mainly involved training and ground weapons, along with modest missile deliveries. Such efforts pale in comparison to Saudi Arabias extensive air war.

Houthis have not turned decision-making over to Iran. Gabriele von Bruck at Londons School of Oriental and African Studies concluded I dont think the Iranians have influence in their decision-making. Its not a relationship like that between Iran and Hezbollah. Obama NSC spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said two years ago: It remains our assessment that Iran does not exert command and control over the Houthis in Yemen.

Contrary to the infamous claim of an Iranian parliamentarian, Tehran does not control Sanaa (nor, in fact, Baghdad, Beirut, and Damascus, the other three capitals mentioned). Instead, noted Juneau, Tehran has come to recognize that a minor investment in Yemen can yield limited but interesting returns, most obviously forcing the Saudi royals to spend much more for little benefit.

Why should America get involved? Former Secretary of State John Kerry claimed that the shipment of Iranian weapons to Yemen was not just a threat to Saudi Arabia, it is a threat to the region, [and] it is a threat to the United States. But Houthis struck beyond Yemens borders only in response to Saudi aggression backed by America. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis complained of Iranian-supplied missiles being fired by the Houthis into Saudi Arabia, but they commenced such actions after Riyadh attacked and killed Yemenis. Saudis sowed the wind by internationalizing the conflict; now they are reaping the whirlwind as Houthi forces attempt to take the battle back to Saudi Arabia.

That is not to say the Houthis are tolerant liberals who like the U.S. But their theology is far more moderate than the Wahhabist teachings funded by the Saudi royals around the world, including in America. Religious minorities do much better in Houthi-dominated areas than in territory controlled by the Hadi-Saudi alliance. This should surprise no one, given Saudi Arabias refusal to allow members of any religious minority to practice their faith.

Nevertheless, the Obama administration made America an active combatant in Yemens civil war. The reason, apparently, was to reassure Riyadh, which was angry that Washington was not doing its bidding in Syria (ousting Bashar al-Assad) and Iran (confronting rather than negotiating with Tehran).

The Saudis have gotten bogged down in the conflict and make little effort to avoid civilian casualties, incriminating the U.S. Shortly before leaving office the Obama administration cut off some weapon shipments to Riyadh. But the Trump administration reversed course, adopting a subservient posture toward the royals. This is an awful policy for several reasons.

First, Washington is rewarding a totalitarian dictatorship for its repression. That Riyadh wants a puppet neighbor is unsurprising. But it isnt Americas responsibility to give one to the Saudi royals.

Second, the conflict has diverted Saudi attention from the most destabilizing and dangerous force in the Mideast, the Islamic State. Riyadh is entitled to choose its own priorities, but Washington should not underwrite counterproductive Saudi efforts. After a Houthi missile attack on a U.S. warship Trump officials expressed concern about navigational freedom, especially in the Bab-el-Mandeb waterway. But Yemenis apparently attacked an American vessel because Washington was helping Saudis kill Yemenis. Before that Houthis never targeted Americans.

Third, the UN human rights coordinator called Yemen the largest humanitarian crisis in the world. Houthis have interfered with the delivery of humanitarian aid, but Saudis and their coalition partners have caused far more death and destruction. More than 10,000 civilians have been killed and 40,000 wounded. Saudi airstrikes, described as indiscriminate or disproportionate by Human Rights Watch, caused at least two-thirds of infrastructure damage and three-quarters of the deaths.

Nearly 19 million people, more than 80 percent of the population, need humanitarian aid. More than ten million have acute need for assistance. About 13 million lack access to clean water. Some 60 percent of Yemens people, or 17 million, are in crisis or emergency situations. The UN World Food Programme warned that the country is on the brink of full-scale famine, with seven million people severely food insecure. Some four million people already are acutely malnourished and 3.2 million have been displaced within the country. Health services have collapsed as the need for care has mushroomed.

Fourth, Hadis restoration would not offer political stability. His support was limited even before Riyadhs intervention, coming more from the West than his own people; backing a brutal foreign attack on his nation has won him no friends. Indeed, warned Zimmerman, The hodgepodge coalition against the al-Houthi-Saleh faction fractures rapidly once the question of power is on the table. None of the main component forces supports Hadi for president and few would support the return of the Yemeni central state as it was. Theres also a separate southern secessionist movement which would try to defenestrate Hadi if he was restored.

Fifth, support for KSA brutality endangers Americans by creating and empowering another adversaries. Washington has turned itself into an enemy of the Yemeni people. U.S. policymakers expressed shock when Houthi forces apparently shot a missile at an American naval vessel, but America is a de facto belligerent and U.S. warships therefore are a legitimate target. The only surprise is that Houthis did not strike sooner.

Internationalizing the war also internationalized the weapons. Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan complained of equipment which Yemeni forces didnt previously possess: there was no explosive boat that existed in the Yemeni inventory. That was before Saudi Arabia turned a civil war into an international sectarian conflict. Moreover, there should be no surprise, let alone shock, if angry Yemenis turn to terrorism. Fear of that possibility may explain the administrations attempt to ban visitors from that nation.

Sixth, the Saudi war effort aided the rise of the Islamic State and Salafi militias. AQAP also is on the rise. The Crisis Group recently warned that the organization is stronger than it has ever been. Noted a recent report from the State Department, AQAP and the Islamic State have exploited the political and security vacuum left by the conflict between the Yemeni government and Houthi-led opposition. AQAP has been significantly expanding its presence in the southern and eastern governorates while ISIL has gained a foothold in the country. The Crisis Group explained that al-Qaeda is thriving in an environment of state collapse, growing sectarianism, shifting alliances, security vacuums and a burgeoning war economy.

AQAPs rise threatens the U.S. Argued former Pentagon official Andrew Exum, Yemens campaign has distracted both the United States and its key partnersnamely the Emiratesfrom the fight against AQAP, one of the few al-Qaeda franchises with the demonstrated will and capability to strike the United States. Even before, Americas allies had shown little interest in battling al-Qaeda. Journalist Laura Kasinof observed that Hadi, lacking internal support, cozied up to the Islamists before his ouster. Zimmerman reported that his regime tacitly cooperated with AQAP in some regions. Moreover, The Saudi-led coalition tolerates AQAPs presence on the battlefield, so long as the group fights against the al-Houthi-Saleh forces.

The Pentagon has felt it necessary to intervene more directly against AQAP, with drone attacks, airstrikes, and special operations forces raids, with costly and controversial results. More strikes are likely, as the president relaxes White House oversight of the war effort. To the extent the organization gains resources and followers, it might succeed in its efforts to hit the American homeland. If so, the Obama and Trump administrations will share the blame.

Candidate Donald Trump was highly critical of President Barack Obamas foreign policy. Why, then, is President Trump doubling down on an unnecessary Middle Eastern war on behalf of an authoritarian regime guilty of promoting Islamic radicalism? Why is he subordinating fundamental American interests and values to those of a country which has provided more terrorists who attacked Americans than any other and done more to finance international terrorism than any other? Why is he entangling the U.S. in another distant, irrelevant, and unwinnable Mideast conflict after criticizing U.S. intervention in Iraq and Libya?

Americans have good reason to engage the KSA, despite its behavior. However, the Trump administration should not genuflect toward Riyadh. Washington should not sacrifice U.S. interests to benefit the Saudi royals. American officials should not enable the killingmurder, reallyof people who have never harmed this nation.

Unfortunately, the administration appears fixated on Iran. Yet, observed Mustafa Alani, director of Dubais Gulf Research Center: It is a myth that Iran is strong. Tehran is at best a modest regional power, lagging well behind Saudi Arabia. President Trump complained in January that Iran is going to have Yemen, along with Iraq and Syria: Theyre going to have everything. But Washington gave, if thats the right word, Iraq to Tehran through its foolish invasion and Syria contains little to possess.

Moreover, nothing in Sanaas history suggests that any Yemeni faction would sacrifice their countrys autonomy. Said Zimmerman: The al-Houthi leadership retains its independence from Iran and has pushed back on Tehrans statements and offers repeatedly. Von Bruck argued that The Houthis want Yemen to be independent, thats the key idea, they dont want to be controlled by Saudi or the Americans, and they certainly dont want to replace the Saudis with the Iranians.

Ironically, in Yemen Tehran is only doing what Saudi Arabia and far more distant America are doing, actively intervening with military force to promote its interests. Iran has as much as Saudi Arabia and far more than America at stake in the Yemen war. Imagine Washingtons reaction if Iran fomented civil war in Mexico, attempting to overthrow a government aligned with the U.S.

Ultimately, a political settlement is necessary, one which puts the interests of the Yemeni people before that of either the Saudi royals or Iranian mullahs. Alas, so far the UN negotiating effort has excluded a role for the Houthis and thereby ignores the fundamental grievances and local conflicts that generated the war in the first place, noted Zimmerman. Such an effort wont result in peace or stability. All foreign parties should step back. Added Zimmerman: Sound American strategy would reach out to the al-Houthis along with other sub-state actors in Yemen, seek common ground with them, and work to facilitate a meaningful resolution of the conflictincluding the underlying popular grievance that are driving it.

Riyadhs policy is at a dead-end. Saudi Arabia offered to make peace with Iran, if Tehran essentially surrendered all of its interests. The totalitarian monarchy in Riyadh proclaimed its support for Yemens elected government, headed by a man with minimal public support. After two years of embarrassing military failure, the deputy crown prince proclaimed that time is in our favor.

Instead of doing the monarchys bidding, the Trump administration should remember that the U.S., not Saudi Arabia, is the superpower, and Washingtons obligation is to the American people, not Saudi Arabias royals. Indeed, President Trump recently reiterated his criticism of Riyadh: Frankly, Saudi Arabia has not treated us fairly, because we are losing a tremendous amount of money in defending Saudi Arabia.

But the problem with the bilateral relationship runs far deeper: America is losing is moral soul by aiding Riyadh in a brutal, aggressive war against an impoverished neighbor. Nothing warrants supporting the promiscuous killing of civilians who have never threatened America. Escalation only guarantees greater failure.

The Yemen war is a disaster. Noted Perry Cammack of the Carnegie Endowment, By catering to Saudi Arabia in Yemen, the United States has empowered AQAP, strengthened Iranian influence in Yemen, undermined Saudi security, brought Yemen closer to the brink of collapse, and visited more death, destruction, and displacement on the Yemeni population. Washington should end this conflict.

Start your workday the right way with the news that matters most.

See the original post:

Saudi Royals Play Donald Trump: Win Support for Oppression and War - HuffPost

Samantha Bee Is Here to Remind Jeff Sessions Why We Don’t Need Another War on Drugs – Slate Magazine (blog)

Posted on by

Jeff Sessions wants to bring back the War on Drugs, but Samantha Bee is not having it. The Full Frontal host spend two-thirds of Wednesdays show attacking attorney general Jeff Sessions opposition to criminal justice reform, one of the few areas that the left and right can agree on, and his Justice Department's reboot of the War on Drugs. (Like most reboots, its bad.) Bee took a deep dive to explain why the first War on Drugs was such a disaster and set about proving that Jeff Sessions one-handcuff-fits-all policy is not the answer to the opioid epidemic.

To further drive the point home, Full Frontal thenalso exposed just how unreliable drug field test kits are, dramatizing two real-world Texas cases in which police pulled over vehicles and then misidentified banal substances like cat litter as illegal substances. Former Houston prosecutor Inger Chandler explains that those tests are widely accepted as evidence in court, despite giving false positives on everything from donut glaze to air. But as Full Frontals segment demonstrates, those false positives can force defendants into taking plea bargains despite a lack of actual evidenceand black defendants are disproportionately affected.

Read the original post:

Samantha Bee Is Here to Remind Jeff Sessions Why We Don't Need Another War on Drugs - Slate Magazine (blog)

Congress’s new approach to the opioid epidemic: the old war on … – Vox

Posted on by

As the US faces its deadliest drug epidemic, the Senate is working on a new approach to deal with the crisis: the old war on drugs.

According to a new report by Carrie Johnson for NPR, a bipartisan pair of senators Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is working on a bill that would create harsher prison sentences for selling synthetic opioids like fentanyl analogs, which have become more common as people have moved from painkillers to other opioids in the course of the crisis.

Johnson reports:

A draft of the legislation reviewed by NPR suggests the plan would give the attorney general a lot more power to ban all kinds of synthetic drugs, since criminals often change the recipe to evade law enforcement. It would impose a 10-year maximum sentence on people caught selling them as a first offense. That would double if they do it again.

Lawmakers argue that the bill is necessary to punish traffickers for drugs that arent already penalized, since the drugs theyre selling are so new that theyre not included in the schedule of controlled substances. This would, then, bring the new drugs in line with other illicit opioids.

But as Michael Collins of the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for lighter penalties for drug offenders, told NPR, the concern is that this new bill will be used to lock up even more low-level drug offenders for longer even those who dont know these new drugs are present in their product.

A key problem in the opioid crisis is that these fentanyl analogs are often added to heroin outside the country. (In some places, its estimated that the majority of heroin is now cut with a fentanyl analog.) The dealer, sometimes unaware that the heroin has been cut with a fentanyl analog, will then sell the goods as if theyre just heroin. Then the buyer will use the drugs and overdose, because the fentanyl analogs make the heroin much more potent than even a hardened heroin user can handle.

Under Grassley and Feinsteins bill, the Department of Justice would be able to punish the dealer for selling that contaminated heroin.

But the dealer might not have any idea that his heroin was cut to begin with, effectively punishing him for something he knew nothing about. These penalties would also be added on top of traditional heroin penalties (for which the dealer would likely have been punished anyway), in effect making prison sentences even longer. And this would punish low-level dealers, not the higher-ups that drive the drug trade adding to the US prison population of low-level drug offenders.

In short, more people would be sent to prison for longer due to low-level drug offenses.

This is a clear example of lawmakers repeating past problematic practices. Although state prison systems (where most prisoners in the US are held) arent made up of very many drug offenders, about half of the federal prison system holds people for drugs. Over the past few years, lawmakers said they were trying to move away from that hence the work surrounding a reform bill that would have effectively cut mandatory minimum prison sentences for drug offenses. Yet now lawmakers want to create even more penalties that could be used to lock up more drug offenders.

The evidence suggests this wont work. By dedicating more resources to more incarceration, lawmakers risk shifting necessary funds from the actual solutions to an ineffective strategy.

A 2014 study from Peter Reuter at the University of Maryland and Harold Pollack at the University of Chicago found theres no good evidence that tougher punishments or harsher supply-elimination efforts do a better job of driving down access to drugs and substance abuse than lighter penalties. So increasing the severity of the punishment doesnt do much, if anything, to slow the flow of drugs.

In fact, the research suggests that harsher punishments in general dont do much to prevent crime. As the National Institute of Justice concluded in 2016, Research shows clearly that the chance of being caught is a vastly more effective deterrent than even draconian punishment. Research has found evidence that prison can exacerbate, not reduce, recidivism. Prisons themselves may be schools for learning to commit crimes.

In other words, more certainty of punishment can deter crime, while more severity through longer prison sentences can actually make crime worse.

This is something that even some former supporters of harsh punishments for drugs now acknowledge. In congressional testimony, Kevin Ring, a former congressional aide who helped enact mandatory minimums and now speaks out against them through the advocacy group Families Against Mandatory Minimums, said, Most of these guys made stupid mistakes without any idea of what the punishment was they just didnt think they were going to get caught. So you can make the severity off the charts you can do a life sentence for jaywalking its not going to stop it.

Or as former federal drug czar Michael Botticelli often said, We cant arrest and incarcerate addiction out of people.

Still, the fact is that America has an opioid problem. In 2015, there were more than 52,000 drug overdose deaths, and nearly two-thirds of those were linked to opioids like Percocet, Vicodin, heroin, and fentanyl. The total number of drug overdose deaths was far greater than the more than 38,000 who died in car crashes, the more than 36,000 who died due to gun violence, and the more than 43,000 who died due to HIV/AIDS during that epidemics peak in 1995.

That the crisis got so bad speaks to the failure of decades of policy: Years of tough on crime approaches couldnt prevent the worst drug crisis in history.

So what can we do about it?

Some policymakers have increasingly focused on the public health side. Theres good reason for that: In the most comprehensive analysis of addiction in America, the surgeon general in 2016 found that the US massively underfunds addiction care. It concluded, for example, that just 10 percent of Americans with a drug use disorder get specialty treatment, in large part due to a shortage in treatment options.

So federal and state officials have pushed for more treatment funding, including medication-assisted treatment like methadone and buprenorphine. In 2016, Congress approved an extra $1 billion in funding over two years for drug treatment in response to the opioid crisis.

But public health advocates argue that more needs to be done to make treatment accessible. Andrew Kolodny, co-director of opioid policy research at the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University, estimates that the US needs to spend potentially tens of billions of dollars more a year to deal with a crisis so grave. Theres an empirical base for that: A 2016 study found that opioid painkiller addiction cost the economy $78.5 billion in 2013, more than a third of which was a result of higher health care and drug treatment costs.

We need a massive increase in funding for addiction treatment, he argued. Were not going to get anywhere in terms of reducing overdose deaths until you have very low threshold access to buprenorphine treatment or methadone in some cases referring to two medications used for treating opioid addiction.

Polls show that most Americans prefer treating drugs as a public health issue, not a criminal one. And many experts, including the International Narcotics Control Board, have asked for a greater focus on public health policies to curtail demand for drugs.

Even some police departments are warming to this approach. For example, in Gloucester, Massachusetts, the police chief in 2015 announced that his officers will no longer charge heroin users with a crime, even if they have drugs, and instead offer to put them in rehabilitative treatment. Other cities, like Cincinnati, have adopted similar approaches.

But some governments and agencies continue perpetuating tough on crime thinking on drugs from Indiana upping prison sentences for drugs to an Ohio town charging heroin users with inducing panic to the bill the Senate is now working on. But the evidence suggests that will all be ineffective, and it could shift resources from where help is really needed.

Read more:

Congress's new approach to the opioid epidemic: the old war on ... - Vox

Flawed, fuzzy numbers in the war on drugs | Headlines, News, The … – Philippine Star

Posted on by

(PCIJ) President Rodrigo Duterte has repeatedly said that drugs are the root of society's many ills. He also seems to see drugs everywhere and in almost anything, even in the ongoing conflict in Marawi. Yet even as his administration's controversial war against illegal drugs continues to claim lives, it has also spawned a side battle over numbers and public-relation points.

Earlier last month, the newly created Inter-Agency Committee on Anti-Illegal Drugs (ICAD) launched #RealNumbersPH, an official report that supposedly offers the true and correct numbers on the drug warfrom the government's perspective. ICAD officials lamented what they called the misreporting and exaggeration by the news media of the numbers of those who were killed, arrested or surrendered. What the ICAD officials left out was that most of those stories were based on information provided by the Philippine National Police (PNP) and other official sources.

In fact, the government's drug war narrative so far has not only been bloody, it has also been blurry. Although government officials have not denied that lives have been lost in the anti-drug campaign, they have yet to explain its narrative that is crowded with constantly changing concepts and terms, even as it is decked in numbers inflated then deflated and later inflated again. Indeed, it is a narrative defined from a war waged mainly as a police operation, its "accomplishments" or success pegged on an ever-lengthening trail of bodies and victims, but with no certain answers for whence or how it should end, and bereft of solid baselines and firm targets.

Over the last 11 months, PCIJ has been monitoring, collecting, curating, and organizing data and documents on the government's war against drugs. It has also sent dozens of request letters to the PNP, the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB), the Department of Health, the Department of Social Welfare and Development, the Department of Budget and Management, the Department of the Interior and Local Government, as well as police regional and local commands to build a database on the drug war. To clarify the numbers enrolled in #RealNumbersPH and gather even more data, PCIJ also conducted separate interviews with senior officials of the PNP, PDEA, and DDB.

Ironically, in the course of its data inquiries, PCIJ found some of the numbers enrolled in reports of #RealNumbersPH to be puzzling at best and too incredible at the very least.

That, however, is just one of the multiplying number riddles in the government's anti-drug campaign.

Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1

By their own data and documents, and according to senior officials from the PNP, PDEA, and DDB interviewed by PCIJ, the Duterte administration's drug war remains wrapped in weak, flabby, misleading and not sufficiently explained and meaningful data and numbers.

It must be stressed that the officials interviewed from all the three agencies admit that these figures are not hard, real numbers. And since they all could be correct only in the particular context in which they were derived, this means they could also be wrong when used outside of that context.

In other words, 11 months into the deployment of Oplan Tokhang and Project Double Barrel, the matter of how many total drug users must be snared or coaxed to surrender under Duterte's drug war remains an unsettled issue.

The DDB's 1.8-million estimate of total drug dependents was derived from a 2015 survey that divided the country into five "regional groupings": Metro Manila, North Luzon, South Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.

The survey aimed to reasonably represent male and female Filipino population aged 10 to 69 years old. After mathematical computations, the survey concluded that the minimum required sample size per regional group would be 838, or a total of 4,190 respondents. But apparently because it had ample available survey funding, the team raised the sample size to 1,000 per regional group, bringing total sample size to 5,000. Field work for the survey was conducted from Dec. 5, 2015 to Feb. 5, 2016.

Of the 5,000 respondents, 4,694 or almost 94 percent were categorized to be "non-users" or had "never used drugs before," including102 who were not aware of any kind of illegal drugs. Only 306 or six percent of the total respondents were "lifetime users" or had used drugs at least once in their lifetime. Of these "lifetime users," 193 or 63 percent had "used drugs before 2015" while 113 or 34 percent were "current users" or had "used drugs within January 2015 and February 2016." Of the 113 "current users," 39 (35 percent) were "one-time users," and 74 (65 percent) were "repeat users."

For much of the ongoing drug war, the PNP has chosen to use the estimate of 1.8 million drug users as basis for calculating its success or passing rate in the government's anti-drug campaign. A PNP document dated Jan. 10 includes an "accounting of drug personalities" portion that cites 70 percent of the 1.8 million estimate number of alleged drug users as the "passing target." That means PNP considered coaxing the surrender of 1.26 million of the total estimated drug users as its passing rate. By the time the document came out, police tallies already had more than 1.43 million of what it called "surrenderers." By its own reckoning thus, the PNP had already hit its minimum target at that point.

President Duterte, however, had initially quoted a 3-million figure but soon turned consistent in insisting that there are 4 million drug dependents in the country, with the figure allegedly coming from "intelligence reports."

Recently, though, PDEA did him even better, saying that drug users in the Philippines now total 4.7 million. This estimate was derived using PDEA's "formula ratio and proportion," which is in turn pegged on the number of surrenderees as a ratio of total households visited under Oplan Tokhang, divided by total number of households in the Philippines, and with a margin of error of 20 percent (supposedly representing the proportion of drug personalities "who did not surrender").

This is PDEA's formula: "The number of total houses visited (under Oplan Tokhang) is to the number of surrenderers is equal to X. Based on the said statistical computation, with a margin of error of 20% - those who did not cooperate with the law enforcers during the house visitation, there are 4.7 million drug users in the Philippines."

According to PDEA, its formula makes this assumption: "For every eight households, there is one drug personality in the household."

Thus, based on data derived from police intelligence and operations reports, PDEA asserts that as of May 18, 2017, "the real number of drug users in the Philippines is 4.7 million."

Then again, a "house" is not exactly a "household"a difference that PDEA's formula ignores. A household represents both the house and its dwellers "a social unit consisting of a person living alone or a group of persons who sleep in the same housing unit and have a common arrangement in the preparation and consumption of food," according to the Philippine Statistics Authority. In contrast, a "house" refers only to the physical dwelling.

Yet a lot more numbers that government uses and #RealNumbersPH reports to define the drug war remain flawed and flabby on two levels: their accuracy on the level of facts and context; and their policy implications.

Except for Central Luzon, there are more DUI cases that the numbers of those killed in anti-drug operations of the police. This implies that vigilante and unnamed armed groups may have netted a far bigger number of casualties among alleged drug users and pushersa sad commentary on the effectiveness and impact of Project Double Barrel. But just a fraction of so-called DUI incidents has triggered the filing of cases in court. And in a majority of these cases, the suspects remain at large.

Given that there are more DUI incidents than the numbers of those killed in police operations, the PNP's Scene-of-Crime Operations (SOCO) unit has only 680 personnel, and the PNP's Internal Affairs Service, only 664 personnel nationwide, as of August 2016. These small numbers of SOCO and IAS personnel (that include those not assigned to investigation) would be hard put running after the rising numbers of DUI and internal-cleansing cases, let alone clear their backlogs even before Double Barrel came into force.

A total of 4,654 firearms and 382 explosives had reportedly been seized by the PNP from a total of 55,481 anti-drug operations, as of May 26, 2017. The prevalence of loose firearms in the areas visited by Project Double Barrel raises concern about possible evidence recycling and how much firearms and explosive yet to be confiscated or recovered by the police.

The numbers of children (26,415, as of Jan. 31, 2017) and women (39,518, as of Jan. 31, 2017) who had "surrendered" continue to rise but there are no sufficient services for them that had been lined up. Across the nation, no government rehab center has a specific rehabilitation program for women and children enrollees; child surrenderees are often referred to government social workers or even mixed with adults in already severely congested rehabilitation facilities and detention centers. DDB reported early efforts of community-based treatment focused on women, but the program is far from being fully rolled out in the whole country.

It seems unusual that the regions registering high numbers of child "surrenderees" (Top 5: Central Visayas, 4,841 children; Northern Mindanao, 4,676; Zamboanga Peninsula, 2,514; Davao Region, 2,266; and Caraga, 2001) did not match the Top 5 regions with the highest numbers of those killed, arrested, and had surrendered under Oplan Tokhang/Project Double Barrel. By the government's composite data on those killed in police operations and DUI incidents, the following regions land on the top 5: Metro Manila, Calabarzon, Central Luzon, Central Visayas, and Northern Mindanao.

How many barangays tagged to be "affected" by drugs had been "cleared" under Tokhang/Project Double Barrel in the last 11 months? There are no specific tracking data for this, except for reports by DDB and PDEA on the numbers of "drug-affected barangays" before July 2016, compared with those as of April 2017. It is unusual that the two sets of numbers show that from only 32 to 36 percent of total barangays classified to be "drug-affected" in July 2016, the figure has grown to 48 percent, out of the total barangays in the country, by April 2017.

The data on "drug-affected barangays" before July 2016 show that the Top 10 regions with the biggest percentage of "drug affectation" are, in order of magnitude, Calabarzon, Metro Manila, Central Luzon, Ilocos Region, Eastern Visayas, Negros Island Region, Western Visayas, Cagayan Valley, Bicol Region, and Caraga. By the numbers of those killed in both police operations and DUI incidents, as of January 2017, the Top 5 regions are Metro Manila, Calabarzon, Central Luzon, Central Visayas, and Northern Mindanao. The Ilocos Region and Eastern Visayas have registered only smaller numbers.

By April 2017, the Top 10 regions, by number of drug-affected barangays follow in order of magnitude are: Ilocos Region, Calabarzon, Central Visayas, Central Luzon, Metro Manila, Cagayan Valley, Caraga, Western Visayas, Mimaropa, and Eastern Visayas. By the numbers of those killed in both police operations and DUI incidents, the Ilocos Region, Central Visayas, and Cagayan Valley have registered smaller numbers.

"Internal cleansing" of police personnel involved in the illegal drugs trade remains a belated, if also hazy, matter in the PNP, in terms of data disclosed to the public. A report received by PCIJ recently from PNP's Double Barrel Secretariat showed that for 2016, only 166 PNP officers and menout of the 145,0000-strong PNPhad been established to be "involved in illegal drugs." The 166 include 158 PNP personnel from regional offices and national support units, and only eight from national headquarters. Of the 166 total, the big clusters have ranks of PO1 (67 personnel), P03 (45), P02 (30), and SP01 (12). In addition, there are also one police superintendent, two chief inspectors, one senior inspector, two inspectors, two SPO3, one SPO2, and three non-uniformed personnel.

A related matter is what the PNP calls its "motu propio investigation" of a total of 331 cases under "remaining investigation," apart from 294 cases "terminated at IID (Investigation and Inspection Division) level, and 119 cases "for pre-charge investigation." It is not clear though if the PNP's numbers also refer to the number of respondents in the cases. Malou Mangahas, Vino Lucero, Davinci Maru, and John Reiner Antiquerra, PCIJ

See the original post:

Flawed, fuzzy numbers in the war on drugs | Headlines, News, The ... - Philippine Star

War on Drugs is costing thousands of lives – San Bernardino County Sun

Posted on by

While American foreign policy has for years fixated on the conflict in Syria and the Middle East, just across the border in Mexico and throughout Central America tens of thousands of people lost their lives last year because of the conflict between drug cartels competing to deliver illicit drugs into the United States.

According to a recent report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies, whereas approximately 50,000 lives were lost in Syria last year, approximately 39,000 were killed in Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador, much of which is attributable to drug-war violence.

Mexicos homicide total of 23,000 for 2016 is second only to Syrias, and is only the latest development in a conflict which stretches back to 2006, when President Felipe Calderon deployed the military to combat drug cartels.

Although the exact number of people killed because of the drug war in Mexico is unlikely to ever be known, a recent report from the Congressional Research Service cited estimates from 80,000 to more than 100,000 in that country alone.

The cause of this violence is obvious, and it is a direct, predictable consequence of our failed policy of drug prohibition. In the near-half century since President Richard Nixon declared a war on drugs, hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans have been killed in conflicts fueled by a lucrative illicit drug trade made possible by our prohibition of drugs.

This is an insight a certain New York developer possessed 27 years ago. Were losing badly the war on drugs, Donald Trump said in 1990. You have to legalize drugs to win that war. You have to take the profit away from these drug czars.

While Trump may have since lost this insight, the fact remains that the war on drugs does more harm than drugs themselves.

Last year, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos used his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to call for a rethink of the drug war, which contributed to decades of conflict in Colombia that killed hundreds of thousands.

Rather than squander more lives and resources fighting a War on Drugs that cannot be won including in our inner cities the United States must recognize the futility and harm of its drug policies.

Advertisement

Read the original post:

War on Drugs is costing thousands of lives - San Bernardino County Sun

Letter: War on drugs | The Daily Courier | Prescott, AZ – The Daily Courier

Posted on by

Editor:

According to County Attorney Sheila Polk, there is a connection between crime and drug use. That is true, but the connection is a result of social and economic issues.

The vast majority of criminals in Yavapai County are of low education and low, if any, wage earners. I am thankful they are not murderers, rapists or robbers.

I am sure Ms. Polk knows the War on Drugs cannot be won and its financial cost is incredible. Also the most damaging drugs to our society are legally obtained. Those drugs are alcohol and nicotine. Unfortunately, it is not politically sound to admit these facts.

In a state where we grossly underfund education it makes no sense to hire more policemen, buy more vehicles and drug smelling canines to fight a war we cannot and will not win.

Bob Launders

Prescott Valley

Here is the original post:

Letter: War on drugs | The Daily Courier | Prescott, AZ - The Daily Courier

As Philippines joins China to fight illegal gambling, more …

Posted on by

By Neil Jerome Morales and Farah Master

MANILA/HONG KONG (Reuters) - China and the Philippines have joined forces to tackle illegal gambling, part of Beijing's broader campaign to curb illicit capital outflows and a pledge by Manila to weed out unscrupulous operators from the country's booming gaming industry.

The coordinated crackdown comes amid warming ties between Chinese President Xi Jinping and his Philippine counterpart Rodrigo Duterte, who has made illegal gambling the third front in his all-out war on crime, after drugs and corruption.

In their first joint exercise, Philippine and Chinese authorities cracked a transnational cyber gambling operation in April, shutting four illegal websites run out of the Philippines, arresting 99 people and freezing more than 1,000 bank accounts, China's Public Security Bureau said.

Martini Cruz, chief of the Philippines National Bureau of Investigation's cyber-crime division, told Reuters authorities were preparing further raids in May targeting illegal betting and online fraud originating in the Philippines and targeted at Chinese gamblers.

"We have been visited by Chinese police to crack down on these illegal gambling operators. They are also targeting possible fugitives who have made our country a sanctuary," Cruz said.

So far, the crackdown has not targeted proxy betting, which is permitted in licensed casinos in the Philippines and has contributed to a boom in VIP revenues. Casinos in the country raked in nearly $3 billion in overall revenue last year.

The practice, in which a gambler outside the casino gives instructions to an agent via a live stream or online platform, allows people to bet anonymously and can allow players to escape the attention of authorities in their home countries.

Industry executives have said increased scrutiny could impact the lucrative proxy business in the Philippines particularly if it continues to ramp up ahead of the official opening of Japanese slot machine tycoon Kazuo Okadas new $2.4 billion casino in the capital Manila in July.

PROXY GAMBLING

While proxy gambling is banned in Singapore and in Macau, the world's largest gambling hub, it operates in a legal gray area in the Philippines and officials tend to tread cautiously when discussing the subject.

Andrea Domingo, the head of the Philippines gaming regulator, PAGCOR, told Reuters she was not familiar with proxy betting.

"It is allowed in the casinos. I am not very conversant about it," she said.

Chinese law forbids citizens from gambling online and at home. The Public Security Bureau has made repeated statements since March that transnational cyber gambling is harmful to the country's economic security, image and stability.

Yet proxy betting is growing at such a pace in the Philippines that Suncity, the top junket operator bringing in high rollers from China, told Reuters in April that 80 percent of its business comes from proxy gambling and 20 percent from customers traveling to casinos for live table games.

Ben Lee, managing partner of IGAMIX Management and Consulting in Macau, said the latest directives this year from China were clear warning signs.

"China warning specifically that they would crack down again on foreign casinos should be heeded by all, especially those operating in the online space," he said.

The proxy business in the Philippines is mainly facilitated by Macau junket operators who bring high rollers into the casinos' opulent VIP parlors, either in person or via proxies. The junkets take on the risk for casinos, settling all credit and debt for the players in Macau, Hong Kong and China via their own internal banking networks.

In a VIP area in a Manila casino, Chinese and Korean nationals wearing earpieces shuffle from table to table after a series of bets, carrying rectangular white plastic trays containing gaming chips and smartphones.

A Macau-based executive whose company operates proxy gambling in the Philippines said there was little concern on the ground in Manila as the practice is licensed by PAGCOR.

To play the game in China is legal online, it is not happening in China, he said, explaining that the casinos install video screening so punters can see the play.

For now, proxy gambling continues to boost the VIP coffers in the Philippines with mega casinos Solaire and City of Dreams reporting double digit VIP volume growth in the first quarter this year. The casinos do not report proxy betting figures.

However, executives in Macau familiar with the VIP boom in the Chinese territory prior to Xis crackdown on corruption and tighter junket regulation cautioned against relying too strongly on the method.

Proxy betting in the Philippines is a ripe target for China, said a senior casino executive based in Macau who was not allowed to be named due to company policy.

For a graphic on Philippine gaming revenues, click http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/PHILIPPINES-CHINA-GAMBLING/0100410B24M/PHILIPPINE-GAMING.jpg

(Reporting by Farah Master in Hong Kong and Jerome Morales in Manila; Editing by Raju Gopalakrishnan)

See the original post:

As Philippines joins China to fight illegal gambling, more ...

NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL Unions Prepare for Sports Gambling – Sports Illustrated

Posted on by

The players unions of the NFL, NBA, NHL and MLB arent sure when sports gambling will be legalized. But they see it as a matter of if, not when. So theyre not going to waste time getting prepared.

The MMQB has learned that the four unions have had a number of formal meetings in New York over the past year-and-a-half to discuss the potential ramifications that legalized sports gambling could present for their players.

Yes, the sports unions have been discussing the issue, in particular around the integrity of our respective games, NFLPA executive George Atallah said Thursdayafternoon. Were collaborating on it. We might be open to changes that are coming because of (legalized sports gambling), but before we get to the revenue aspect of it, do we have the infrastructure in place to prevent any sort of shenanigans? Thats the issue.

Atallah said the unions have started looking at how legalized sports gambling and those associated issues are handled overseas in areas where its been legal for decades. Theyre also monitoring legislation in New Jersey, which has been the primary battleground for legalized sports gambling.

Nevada remains the only state where sports gambling is legal, and the sports leagues are about to set down roots there for the first time. The NHLs expansion Vegas Golden Knights begin play this fall. The NFLs Raiders will move from Oakland and into a new $1.9 billion stadium there in 2020, and could be there sooner depending on what happens with their lease in the Bay Area.

Meanwhile, the NBA held its All-Star Game in Vegas in 2007, and commissioner Adam Silver has come out as a proponent of legalizing sports gambling.

All of that signifies change, as Vegas was long seen as a forbidden land for professional sports. And while the NFLs comments publicly have been far more conservative than Silvers, there was a quiet admission from NFL ownersbefore they unanimously voted the Raiders move to Vegasthat a sea change was coming.

From a gambling standpoint? Thats a joke to even say thatd be a problem, one AFC owner told The MMQB in late March. That was an issue decades ago. Now? Sports gambling is going to be legal. We might as well embrace it and become part of the solution, rather than fight it. Its in everyones best interests for it to be above board.

The first question, naturally, is going to be about gambling, said an NFC owner. But any of us can pull our phones out of our pockets and place a bet right now. (The concern) is not 100 percent put to bed, but its relatively put to bed, just because of technology today.

The sports-gambling summits over the past 18 months have been attended by the executive directors of the four unionsthe NFLPAs DeMaurice Smith, the MLBPAs Tony Clark, the NBPAs Michele Roberts and the NHLPAs Donald Fehrand are just another acknowledgment of whats likely not far off.

For us, its about getting the right infrastructure in place, said Atallah. Before we get to the revenue splits, how do you monitor behavior like they do in other parts of the world to ensure what were all watching isnt fixed? Thats the question.

Question or comment?Email us attalkback@themmqb.com.

Read the original here:

NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL Unions Prepare for Sports Gambling - Sports Illustrated

Anti-police mural led to gambling charges, store owner claims – Fort Worth Star Telegram

Posted on by
Anti-police mural led to gambling charges, store owner claims
Fort Worth Star Telegram
A store owner repeatedly charged with gambling claimed Thursday that police targeted him because of a mural depicting police violence he had on the side of his building last year. Rocky's Drive Thru owner Ameer Rocky Hirani said the police are ...

Read this article:

Anti-police mural led to gambling charges, store owner claims - Fort Worth Star Telegram

Lehigh Valley lawmaker rolls the dice in gambling expansion vote – Allentown Morning Call

Posted on by

The Lehigh Valleys only lawmaker thus far supporting a House bill to add up to 40,000 video slot machines in the state happens to be an avid gambler herself.

Rep. Marcia Hahn, R-Northampton, has claimed earnings from casinos five out of six years she has filed Statement of Financial Interest forms with the state Ethics Commission.

Hahn was first elected in 2010. Her first filing was the following year.

Mt. Airy Casino and Sands Casino are her establishments of choice, according to financial forms filed between 2011 and 2016. Legislators arent required to list the amount of income, but are required to disclose where any outside income came from.Below are the details listed on those forms:

The slot machines and raffles havent quite paid off for Hahn, despite the income claimed.

Id probably say I lose more than I win, she said in a phone interview.

The House bill, approved 102-89 on Wednesday night, would legalize video betting machines in bars, nursing homes, VFWs, volunteer fire halls, restaurants, bowling alleys, truck stops, hotels and other places licensed to sell alcohol. The machines, known as video gaming terminals, or VGTS, are strongly opposed by all but one of the states casinons and a majority of the Senate.

The House added the VGT piece to a Senate plans that would legalize fantasy sports, internet betting and let the Pennsylvania Lottery sell tickets online.

The bill is now in the Senate, where Hahan may find company. Sen. Lisa boscola, D-Northampton, is a VGT supporter.

If the bill dies in the Senate, it could leave a $150 million hole in next years budget. Thats how much Gov. Tom Wolfs administration has earmarked in estimated tax revenue from expanded gambling in the fiscal year that starts July 1.

Go here to read the rest:

Lehigh Valley lawmaker rolls the dice in gambling expansion vote - Allentown Morning Call

Illegal gambling operations busted in Northwest Ohio – 13abc Action News

Posted on by

Ohio (WTVG) - The Ohio Casino Control Commission busted three businesses in Erie, Huron and Sandusky Counties for illegal gambling.

According to agents with the commission, machines inside these businesses were paying out cash prizes, which is a violation of Ohio law.

Warrants were served at the following locations: -Do Drop In, 5500 Milan Rd. in Sandusky, Ohio -Do Drop In, 122 N. Washington St, in Tiffin, Ohio -Do Drop In, 115 Blossom Center Blvd. in Willard, Ohio -Moore Residence, 11903 Township Road 178 in Bellevue, Ohio -Patterson Residence, 3020 Egypt Rd in Willard, Ohio

Agents seized gaming machines during the multi-county raid. They did not make any arrests. The Ohio Casino Control Commission continues its investigation.

"The Commission takes its responsibility to ensure the integrity of gaming in Ohio seriously, and we will hold accountable those who choose to violate the state's gaming laws," said June Taylor, Chair of the Ohio Casino Control Commission. "We appreciate the assistance we received today from local law enforcement in shutting down these illegal establishments that take advantage of Ohioans."

Follow this link:

Illegal gambling operations busted in Northwest Ohio - 13abc Action News

Friday’s letters: We need a constitutional amendment on gambling – Tampabay.com

Posted on by

Legislature neglected gambling | Editorial, June 6

We need gambling amendment

The Times correctly pointed out in a recent editorial the dysfunction surrounding gambling policy in Florida. The problem is that in Tallahassee, a comprehensive solution to gambling has become a euphemism for expansion. It seems that in the eyes of some legislators, controlling gambling somehow requires expanding it. Solutions to serious problems are held hostage to unwanted expansion.

We saw that yet again in this year's legislative session as a so-called comprehensive bill passed by the Florida Senate included the biggest expansion of gambling in state history.

Luckily, the House did not bite. But if it had, rest assured this would not have been the final word. Given unlimited resources and unlimited time, gambling interests tend to get their way in state capitals.

The only way to manage gambling without expanding it is to return decisions over gambling expansion to voters. That's the way it was for decades, because Florida's Constitution includes a ban on most forms of gambling. But recent murky case law has given rise to the notion that legislators can ignore the Constitution and do whatever they want.

This is why we are moving forward with plans to place the Voter Control of Gambling Amendment on the 2018 ballot. The amendment provides a much needed bright line as to what forms of gambling are authorized in Florida by requiring that in order for casino gambling to be authorized in Florida, it must be approved by voters through citizens' initiative.

It removes legislators, lobbyists and gambling industry political contributions from the process of authorizing casino gambling. In doing so, it also closes gambling loopholes that have been exploited over the years.

This amendment is the only approach that will create a comprehensive and transparent solution to gambling expansion in Florida.

Paul Seago, Orlando The writer is executive director of No Casinos.

Mayors join climate pledge | June 5

Coastal Florida is at risk

Studies have shown Florida is more at risk from climate change than any other state. Still, some residents do not believe sea level is rising here. Plan a trip to southeast Florida or the Keys during an expected period of seasonal high tide. You will observe the ocean roll onto roads and sidewalks and gurgle up through manhole covers. Localized nuisance? Not really this has resulted in salt water getting into drinking water wells for cities and damage to other infrastructure. A one-foot rise can move the shoreline inward by more than a thousand feet.

Scientists at Ringling College carried out a demonstration to allow people to visualize what this would mean over time to Siesta Beach, recently voted "best beach" in the United States. Using NOAA predictions, by 2030 hundreds of feet of the beach will be underwater. By 2040 the beach will be gone, the current parking lots and a portion of Beach Road will be underwater.

An estimated $69 billion of Florida property sits on land less than two feet above high tide. By 2030, they will likely all be affected by sea water rise. The economic impact on this state will be enormous. Unless strong, immediate steps are taken to reduce further harmful emissions Florida's economy and people will suffer catastrophic damages.

Joseph Valenti, Tampa

Vote hack took aim at Florida | June 7

We're under cyber attack

I am furious that a foreign government intruded into the U.S. electoral process. Our country was isolationist in the late 1930s and early 1940s as our leaders watched the Axis roll across Europe. It wasn't until bombs rained down on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, that we began to move away from isolationism. The country came together to fight the enemies that attacked us. I lived through those years.

Today our country is attacked by a foreign power not with bombs but in cyberspace. We are in the early stages of isolationism reminiscent of the 1930s. We are pulling away from our friends and are not banding together to face the enemy. Some of our political elite are more concerned about leaks than defending our country and its values.

Robert Bucklin, Zephyrhills

Water agency withdraws rule for rewrite | June 7

Residents need the water

Local "leaders" have finally admitted we have too many people for the water resources available. The only problem is the local "leaders" never implement building restrictions. The politicians tell us there are too many people using the water so you citizens stop using water. But they won't tell their real estate, development and construction buddies to stop building.

We citizens have to suffer for it. We can't use our water, we're stuck in the traffic jams, and the infrastructure continues to degrade, even with the insufferable, continuous (assuredly boondoggled) construction that never seems to end.

I do understand that if we don't progress we regress. But for us in the limited available acreage of most of Tampa Bay, shouldn't the politicians represent us current citizens in safety and quality of life? When do we stand up and say enough is enough? When they hand us one bottle of water and a loaf of bread?

Steve Krall, Seminole

Trump embarrasses himself and America again | Column, June 5

The math of bullets

President Trump tweeted "Do you notice we are not having a gun debate right now? That's because they used knives and a truck!"

But we should be having that debate. The three terrorists in London killed eight using knives and a van. A single terrorist in a crowded bar with an assault rifle in the United States killed 49 and wounded 53. England has strict restrictions on gun ownership. The math is easy to do. If assault rifles were as easy to get in London as in the United States the three London terrorists could have killed 147 instead of eight.

Peter Stecher, Brandon

Friday's letters: We need a constitutional amendment on gambling 06/08/17 [Last modified: Thursday, June 8, 2017 5:48pm] Photo reprints | Article reprints

Read more:

Friday's letters: We need a constitutional amendment on gambling - Tampabay.com

New Zealand likely to legalise euthanasia – 9news.com.au

Posted on by

Euthanasia could be legal in New Zealand in less than a year with legislation to come before parliament in as little as a few weeks.

The End of Life Choice Bill was plucked at random from the members' ballot on Thursday, almost two years after it was first included, and there's confidence it has the numbers to pass.

It would give people over 18 with a terminal illness or a "grievous" medical condition the option to choose assisted dying if they have the support of two doctors.

Act Party leader David Seymour, the party's sole MP, is confident MPs will easily pass the legislation and says at best, assisted suicide could be legal in just under a year.

He says Kiwis are capable of having the discussion, taking aim at Australian politicians who are yet to consider same-sex marriage or physician-assisted dying.

"It might be an issue with the Australian public but in New Zealand, they are quite capable of separating [issues around euthanasia]," he said.

But the timing could be troubling for some MPs, with it yet to be determined if the legislation will come before the House of Representatives ahead of the September election.

"It will then take another six months to a year after that before it's potentially passed into law and of course we've got to make sure we've got the numbers at each of the three votes," Mr Seymour said.

New Zealand's unicameral system means the legislation only needs to pass through a committee stage and three readings in the House of Representatives before becoming law.

In the last count six months ago, there were 40 votes in support, 27 opposed and around 50 MPs undecided.

The unknown factor is new MPs who will enter parliament after the September 23 election.

Across New Zealand, polling puts public support for legalising euthanasia above 70 per cent.

If successful it would be the second major piece of conscience legislation passed by New Zealand's parliament in the last few years.

While the same-sex marriage debate continues to rage in Australia, Kiwis have been happily marrying for four years.

State parliaments in both Victoria and New South Wales are expected to consider euthanasia legislation later this year.

But just last month legislation failed to pass Tasmania's lower house, with twice as many MPs opposing change as those in favour.

A bill in South Australia was defeated by a single vote last November.

AAP 2017

Auto News:2017 Mercedes-AMG E63 S - the one we've been waiting for - caradvice.com.au

Career news: Three common career progression questions answered- seek.com.au

Auto news:New BMW M5 detailed - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Ford Australia vs Holden; who will win the battle on the racetrack? - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Suzuki is Australia's lovable underdog - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Jaguar's tough limited-tun XE SW Project 8 sports sedan - caradvice.com.au

Auto news:Battle of the V8 Beasts: 5.0L Ford Mustang vs 6.2L Holden Commodore - caradvice.com.au

View post:

New Zealand likely to legalise euthanasia - 9news.com.au

What is euthanasia and assisted suicide law in the UK and what is the mercy killing debate? – The Sun

Posted on by

Euthanasia and assisted dying is a controversialissue, with passionate campaigners on each side of the argument

THE debate around euthanasia and assisted dying in the UK is a controversial and complicated one with some saying choosing when to die is to die with dignity, while others claim it undermines the value of human life.

So what is euthanasia and assisted suicide and what is the debate surrounding this issue? We explain the details surrounding this sensitive and divisive subject.

Getty Images

Euthanasia, sometimes known as mercy killing, is the practice of intentionally ending someones life to relieve their pain and suffering.

Assistedsuicide is deliberately helping or encouraging someone to take their own life, for example by providingthem with medicine to do so.

The term comes from an ancient Greek phrase meaning good death.

Both are illegal in the UK with euthanasia carrying a maximum penalty of life in jail, and assisted suicide 14 years. The only exception is passive euthanasia, which is where treatment that might extend someones life is withdrawn such as a life machine being turned off.

The only alternatives for terminally ill patients in the UK arehospice care or refusing treatment, which mentally capable patientshave the right to do.

As a result, some terminally ill people decide to travel abroad to die.In Switzerland, where assisted suicide is legal (but euthanasia is not), you do not have to be a Swiss citizen to use a clinic.However, it is not cheap assisted suicide non-profit Dignitas charges patients 3,380 for its services.

Reuters

Euthanasia anddying is a controversialissue with passionate campaigners on each side of the argument.

People who agree with euthanasia often argue that people should be allowed to die with dignity and they should be able to decide when and how they die, and potentially save their loved ones the pain of seeing them suffer.

Some also believe death is private, and its not the states place to interfere if a person wants to die.

Meanwhile, those in favour of euthanasia also point out that we euthanise our pets as an act of kindness and resources could be put towards people who want to live, or whose conditions are curable.

However, there are concerns that allowing euthanasia would give doctors too much power, and might even worsencare for the terminally ill and research into their illnesses.

Some also believe it goes against the job description of doctors and nurses and undermines the value of human life.

Others also worry about the possibility of someone potentially recovering, or changing their mind when its already too late. Some have even suggestedit could lead to people feeling pressured into asking to die, as they dont want to be a burden upon those around them.

Getty Images

Many religious people are opposed to euthanasia and assisted dying too, as they believe God decides when we die.

Right now, despite fierce campaigning from organisations such as Dignity in Dying, the law is showing no signs of changing in the UK.

In September 2015MPs debated the issue for the first time in almost 20 years but the Assisted Dying Bill was rejected by 330 votes to 118, leading to reformers branding MPs ridiculously out of touch.

Motor neurone disease sufferer Noel Conway is one of the latest to try and challenge UK law on assisted dying.

The retired college lecturer took his case to the Court of Appeal after he was refused permission to bring a judicial review over the blanket ban on providing a person with assistance to die.

His lawyers said when he has less than six months to live and retains the mental capacity to make the decision, he would wish to be able to enlist assistance to bring about a peaceful and dignified death.

He claims the Suicide Act 1961 is incompatible with Article 8, which relates to respect for private and family life, and Article 14, which protects from discrimination.

Sun columnist Lorraine Kelly agreed, saying it was cruel for the state to deny him a peaceful death.

Lord Justice McFarlane and Lord Justice Beatsondecided in his favour on April 12, 2017, granting him the right to bring a High Court legal challenge.

Earlier this year a Belgian Paralympian caused controversy when she told reporters in Rioshe signed euthanasia papers in 2008 but is not ready to go through with it yet.

Marieke Vervoort, 37,suffers from an incurable degenerative muscle disease andpicked up the silver medal in the 400m T52 final.

See original here:

What is euthanasia and assisted suicide law in the UK and what is the mercy killing debate? - The Sun

Oakland County animal shelter’s decreasing euthanasia rates mirror … – The Oakland Press

Posted on by

Over several decades, the Oakland County Animal Control and Pet Adoption Center is following a national trend toward euthanizing less animals brought in.

Bob Gatt, director of the shelter, says that the facility hovers at about a 90-percent no-kill rate, a number that is looked upon favorably in the industry.

Gatt says there are several factors in the trend in Oakland County toward lower euthanasia rates:

There is no time limit on how long an adoptable pet can stay in the shelter awaiting a new home, a change from decades ago. Weve had animals in here for over a year, he says.

Advertisement

There is better education about having pets spayed and neutered, resulting in less unwanted litters of puppies and kittens, Gatt said.

More prospective pet owners are aware of the option of adopting a dog or cat from a shelter, he said.

According to some estimates, animal shelters nationwide killed as many as 20 million cats and dogs annually in the 1970s. That had fallen to 2.6 million by 2011 and to 1.5 million currently, according to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

The Oakland County shelter handles 4,000 to 5,000 animals per year. Generally, only those deemed unadoptable are euthanized. Unadoptable animals are seriously ill or injured without a reasonable hope of improving, deemed vicious or have traits that make them unsuitable to be pets, Gatt said.

The shelter, at 1700 Brown Road in Auburn Hills, employs several full-time veterinary technicians and part-time veterinarians. Animals brought in sick or injured are treated on site whenever possible or sent out to a veterinarian for treatment if no staff member is available.

Animals rights groups consistently question the shelters euthanasia figures, but Gatt says those groups are an important factor in the decrease in animals being put down.

Over the years, the groups have brought awareness to more humane treatment of animals.

Even the ones who dont like me, I applaud them, Gatt said.

A new state-of-the-art shelter is to open this summer in the Oakland County municipal complex at Telegraph and Pontiac Lake roads.

See original here:

Oakland County animal shelter's decreasing euthanasia rates mirror ... - The Oakland Press

Shau Kei Wan tragedy sparks debate on euthanasia – EJ Insight

Posted on by

An 80-year-old man who killed his paralyzed wife in Shau Kei Wan did it to spare her from further suffering, his younger brother said.

He said the condition of his sister-in-law had deteriorated when he visited the couple during the Tuen Ng festival, news website hk01.com reports.

Half of her body was paralyzed. My brother gave her massages, cooked for her and bathed her, he said.

He said that as euthanasia is illegal in Hong Kong, his brother had no choice but to kill his wife to end her misery.

In December, Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man said the government had no plans to legalize euthanasia or hold any public consultations on it.

Ko said there had been some requests for euthanasia from terminally ill patients who later changed their minds after being given proper palliative care.

Ko said patients can use advance directive to spell out decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time.

Lawmaker Shiu Ka-chun, who represents the social welfare functional constituency, said euthanasia is an issue civilized societies cannot avoid.

He said he hoped the Shau Kei Wan tragedy could induce more public discussions on the controversial subject.

Former lawmaker Cheung Kwok-che, said that while society can discuss and debate euthanasia, legislation alone cannot help prevent cases as happened in Shau Kei Wan.

Cheung said there are are strict requirements for legal euthanasia to be given, including certain medical conditions, and not just the will of the patient.

According to Ko, euthanasia is only legal in a few countries such as the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.

Edward Leung Man-fuk, chairperson of the Hong Kong Association of Gerontology, said euthanasia or advance directive is the giving up of interventional treatment on a terminally ill patient. However, such conditions are not applicable for patients who suffered a stroke.

Leung said it is more important to improve the support system of the patients caregivers to avoid tragedies.

With Hong Kongs population rapidly aging, Leung said the government should review the relevant policies to tackle the issue.

In Taiwan, family caregivers can opt to take a short break from their long-term caregiving with government providing temporary caregivers.

This way, family caregivers who can choose to stay on premises provided by the government for a short period, can take a break from the burdens of looking after ailing family members.

- Contact us at [emailprotected]

EL/AC/RA

View post:

Shau Kei Wan tragedy sparks debate on euthanasia - EJ Insight

Julie Anne Genter’s medicinal cannabis bill, David Seymour’s … – TVNZ

Posted on by

Parliament is set to debate two big controversial issues - euthanasia and medicinal cannabis - in election year.

Medical cannabis.

Source: istock.com

ACT leader David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill was drawn from the member's bill ballot today, along with Green MP Julie Anne Genter's Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis and Other Matters) Amendment Bill.

Both will go on Parliament's agenda for a first reading.

The End of Life Choice Bill gives people with a terminal illness or a "grievous and irremediable medical condition" the option of requesting assisted dying.

It defines those eligible and details a comprehensive set of provisions to ensure it is a free choice made without coercion.

It also outlines a stringent series of steps to ensure the person is mentally capable of understanding the nature and consequences of their decision.

MPs will have a conscience vote on the bill, and parties won't take positions on it.

"Fantastic news, long awaited," Mr Seymour tweeted.

Assisted dying has been debated twice before by Parliament, the first time was in 1995, when the Death With Dignity Bill was defeated 61-29 on its first reading.

The second time was in 2003, when another Death With Dignity Bill was defeated 60-58, also on its first reading.

Green MP Julie Anne Genter also Tweeted her excitement about her medicinal cannabis bill being pulled from the ballot this afternoon.

The purpose of the medicinalcannabis bill is to make the drug legal for New Zealanders who are suffering from terminal illness or chronic illness to use cannabis or cannabis products with the support of a registered medical practitioner.

The bill aims to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act to give a person living with a terminal illness the right to "cultivate, possess or use the cannabis plant" and or "cannasbis products for therapeutic purposes" as long as the person is supported by a registered medical practitioner.

Currently, cannabis-based products can only be used with permission from the Ministry of Health and are dealtwith a case to case basis.

Read the original:

Julie Anne Genter's medicinal cannabis bill, David Seymour's ... - TVNZ

Lecretia Seales’ widower says she ‘would be over the moon’ with … – TVNZ

Posted on by

Lecretia Seales' widower says the late euthanasia campaigner would be "over the moon" at news that a voluntary euthanasia bill will be debated in parliament.

ACT leader David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill was drawn from the member's bill ballot today.

Speaking to media at parliament today, Matt Vickers says, "Lecretia would be very happy ... she would be over the moon that this has finally got to the point where it's coming before the House".

Lecretia Seales died of brain cancer in June 2015. A Wellington based lawyer, she campaigned for voluntary euthanasia to be made legal.

In the week before she dieda High Court judgment ruled against Ms Seales allowing a doctor to euthanise her without fear of prosecution.

Mr Vickers today welcomed the issue of euthanasia once again being thrust into the spotlight.

"When Lecretia took her case in 2015 she was hoping to galvanise political action through that case ... but the hope of course was to get a bill introduced into parliament."

He went on to say that he's, "very happy with the news today and can't wait for it to be debated in parliament and for the proper evidence based discussion to take place".

Strong opposition in public submissions

The End of Life Choice Bill gives people with a terminal illness or a "grievous and irremediable medical condition" the option of requesting assisted dying.

It defines those eligible and details a comprehensive set of provisions to ensure it is a free choice made without coercion.

It also outlines a stringent series of steps to ensure the person is mentally capable of understanding the nature and consequences of their decision.

MPs will have a conscience vote on the bill, and parties won't take positions on it.

In May, 1 NEWS reported how an anti-euthanasia group's analysis of submissions made to the Health Select Committee investigating medically assisted dying, had found the majority opposed legalisation of euthanasia.

More than 21,000 written submissions were received, after a petition was taken to parliament in 2015 calling for an overhaul of euthanasia laws.

The Care Alliance reviewed each submission, and found 77 per cent opposed legalisation, 19.5 per cent were in support, and 3.4 per cent were neutral or unclear.

See the original post:

Lecretia Seales' widower says she 'would be over the moon' with ... - TVNZ

Independent business owners thank police and the ECHO for ending burglary "epidemic" – Liverpool Echo

Posted on by

Independent business owners suffering from a burglary epidemic today thanked Merseyside Police and the ECHO for bringing those responsible to justice.

An emergency meeting was called in April this year after we revealed a crime wave plaguing bars and restaurants in Liverpool city centre.

Some victims were even considering hiring their own security wardens to tackle determined crooks operating in Bold Street and Dale Street.

Frustrated owners sought help from the police, council representatives and members of Liverpool Business Investment District (BID).

Officers have arrested 19 suspects since April 10 and six of these men are now facing more than 11 years behind bars in total.

They include:

Alan Bell, 45, of Prescot Road, Old Swan - jailed for 18 months

James Riley, 38, of Boundary Street, Vauxhall - jailed for two years and four months

Marshall Tung, 30, of no fixed address - jailed for three years

Daniel Tung, 18, of no fixed address - jailed for two years

James Quarton, 28, of no fixed address - jailed for five months

Colin Spicer, 47, of Seel Street, Liverpool - jailed for 20 months

Gareth Morgan, who owns Dead Crafty Beer Company, suffered 1,600 of damage to a window and till area when Spicer and Bell struck.

He described the crime spree as an epidemic, but today said: It just shows what the police can do when they have the right resources for something.

Video Unavailable

Click to play Tap to play

Play now

Our CCTV has helped to catch one of these guys, so that was clearly worth the investment.

I think the ECHO drawing attention to it has certainly helped and possibly made the police step things up - which they have done and has clearly been a good thing.

Staff at nearby Dale Street Eatery were also happy with the results, tweeting they could sleep a little better after hearing Spicer had been jailed.

Tariq Batayneh runs the restaurant with his wife Lenka Balkova, which twice had its windows smashed during raids by Spicer and Quarton.

She said it was so sad to watch people on CCTV smashing through the business you have worked so hard on and ruining our livelihoods.

But today Mr Batayneh said: We feel a lot better after these results and we would like to thank the police for their work.

We would also like to thank the Liverpool ECHO who really helped us to get the message out. We just feel a lot safer now.

Both Dale Street Eatery and Dead Crafty Beer are now working with the council to look at installing new shutters at their premises.

City centre councillor Nick Small, who organised the urgent meeting, said small independent businesses were the lifeblood of our city centre.

The talks were also attended by Otto Mellouki, who runs Koop and Bakchich restaurants in Bold Street, both of which had been targeted.

A community policing team patrolled the areas to offer reassurance, while officers visited businesses to provide security advice.

Meanwhile undercover and uniformed officers walked city centre streets during the day and night to identify those responsible.

Superintendent Mark Wiggins said: Business burglaries are not victimless crimes.

Many of these businesses are local people who just want to earn a living and the actions of this group have not just left businesses out of pocket, they have the potential to damage the confidence of those local people running the businesses.

We committed resources to help combat this problem following a series of burglaries.

I hope todays result sends a strong message to anyone considering this type of criminality to think again.

Supt Wiggins said it was in everyones interest to help solve and prevent crimes against people providing a vital service to our communities.

He added: Liverpool city centre has continued year on year to be awarded Purple Flag status, and is consistently recognised as one of the safest cities in the UK.

We will continue to work hard with our partners to ensure the city remains a safe place with a good reputation, which encourages people to continue to enjoy what the city has to offer.

Anyone with information about these incidents is urged to contact Merseyside Police on 101 or the confidential Crimestoppers number 0800 555 111.

Read more here:

Independent business owners thank police and the ECHO for ending burglary "epidemic" - Liverpool Echo